Metro Manila, Philippines – Two witnesses from the Landbank of the Philippines described the large cash withdrawals of the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and the Department of Education (DepEd) under the leadership of Vice President Sara Duterte as “unusual.”
On Wednesday, July 29, the tenth day of the impeachment trial, the prosecution called the following witnesses to testify on Duterte’s alleged misuse of ₱612.5 million in confidential funds from the OVP and DepEd:
+Violeta Constantino, retired branch manager of the Land Bank of the Philippines (Landbank) Shaw Boulevard branch; and,
+Nenita Camposano, former branch manager of the Landbank DepEd branch
The prosecution opened with Constantino, who has 32 years of experience in Landbank. During the panel’s direct examination, she told the Impeachment Court that OVP special disbursing officer Gina Acosta encashed four checks worth ₱125 million, which was then stuffed in three to four gym bags.
Asked by senator-judge Erwin Tulfo if other government agencies had made cash withdrawals of this amount, Constantino said: “Unusual po ito [this is unusual].”
Per Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Circular No. 1215, a transaction is considered unusual “when it shows patterns that are inconsistent with the account owner’s usual behavior, is not commensurate with the known business or financial capacity of the account owner, or deviates from the account owner’s profile.”
The circular also describes unusual transactions as those that are inconsistent in amount, origin, destination, or type with an account owner’s known legitimate business or activities or are significantly larger than the typical transactions of an account owner.
“Sa personal opinion namin sa banko, parang syempre po saan kaya gagamitin yung cash na ‘to pero hindi naman namin tinanong na kasi may advise siya,” the former bank manager added, explaining that the OVP had informed them of the withdrawal beforehand.
[Translation: In our personal opinion at the bank, we did wonder how they would use the cash but we didn’t ask because we were advised of the transaction beforehand.]
Constantino clarified that the transaction was unusual because of the large amount, but not necessarily suspicious. She also said that the bank did not know if it would be used as confidential funds.
Asked if her branch reported the transaction to the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC), Constantino invoked the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) and refused to confirm or deny whether Landbank reported these transactions.
Once the prosecution concluded its direct examination, defense spokesperson Michael Poa said that the defense had “nothing to cross.”
After a brief recess, the prosecution brought out Camposano, who worked at the Landbank DepEd branch from May 2022 to September 2024.
Camposano likewise described the encashment of three checks worth ₱37.5 million to DepEd Special Disbursing Officer Edward Fajarda, as unusual. DepEd’s previous cash transactions with Landbank averaged around ₱10 million, she noted.
She said that in her 34 years of experience in Landbank, this was her first time encountering such a large transaction with the DepEd.
According to Camposano, after Landbank released the cash to Fajarda, the DepEd official exited the bank premises through a back room with a fire exit.
Poa did cross-examine Camposano on the nature of Fajarda’s departure via the fire exit. The bank manager said that Fajarda left that way as a matter of safety.
‘Unusual is the perfect start’
Earlier in the day, House prosecution spokesperson Ace Barbers pointed out that it was a “striking coincidence” that Constantino’s testimony about gym bags filled with cash closely closely resembled a statement made by Ramil Madriaga, Duterte’s self-confessed bagman.
During the House justice committee hearing in April, Madriaga said he delivered ₱125 million in four duffle bags to different people in less than 24 hours.
In a post-trial press briefing, Poa responded to Barbers’ claim: “We’ll have to just prove our point during our cross-examination of the witness Madriaga if he is in fact presented.”
Meanwhile, House prosecutor Lorenz Defensor described the bank officials’ testimonies as a solid start to the prosecution’s presentation of its evidence against Duterte’s alleged misuse of confidential funds.
“Unusual is the perfect start for the prosecution pagdating sa [when it comes to] confidential funds. We will let the evidence lead the court to a finding of betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution in the coming trial days,” Defensor said.
