The Office of the Ombudsman can utilize sworn testimony and documentation submitted during Vice President Sara Z. Duterte’s impeachment trial to accelerate its ongoing investigation into the alleged misuse of confidential funds, a House prosecution team official suggested.
House impeachment team adviser and spokesperson Robert Ace Barbers said witnesses had already provided sworn testimony before the Senate impeachment court, offering the Ombudsman concrete evidence to evaluate when determining whether to file criminal charges.
“Well, naniniwala ako na it will save the Ombudsman sufficient time to conduct their preliminary investigation in order to develop a case and file it before the Sandiganbayan,” Barbers said during a press briefing.
He noted that the testimonies covered the management and disbursement of confidential funds allocated to the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and the Department of Education (DepEd).
“So nangyari na po ’yan, lumabas na po ‘yung testigo sa impeachment court at ito ay pwede nang gamitin ng ating Ombudsman para maging basehan sa kanilang pag-file ng kaso before the court,” Barbers also said.
The suggestion comes after the Commission on Audit (COA) recently affirmed with finality the disallowance of P73.287 million in OVP confidential expenditures from December 2022 due to deficient supporting documentation.
Barbers stressed that the Ombudsman must independently assess the evidence to establish whether sufficient grounds exist for criminal prosecution.
“Of course, we will give the Office of the Ombudsman to study ‘yung mga ebidensya na ito, mga testimonies na ito na iniharap before the impeachment court,” Barbers added.
Plunder and related criminal complaints have already been lodged against Duterte over the alleged misuse of P612.5 million in OVP and DepEd confidential funds. These filings include complaints submitted in December 2025 and January 2026, with the latter filed by former Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV alongside other complainants.
On Tuesday, the Senate impeachment court granted the withdrawal of Article I regarding the alleged misuse of confidential funds, Article III regarding bribery, and Article IV regarding grave threats and related allegations.
Only Article II, which addresses alleged unexplained wealth, inaccurate asset declarations, and prohibited business interests, remains before the court for final determination.
The House prosecution maintained that the withdrawal of the confidential funds charge from the impeachment trial does not bar separate criminal proceedings against Duterte, which remain subject to independent evidentiary evaluation and statutory legal processes.