The third article in the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte accuses her of bribery, graft and corruption, culpable violation of the Constitution, and betrayal of public trust over alleged irregularities in procurement processes at the Department of Education (DepEd).
The complaint urged the Senate, acting as an impeachment court, to convict Duterte, remove her from office, permanently disqualify her from holding public office, and subject her to possible criminal prosecution under existing laws.
According to the complaint, several DepEd officials allegedly received cash-filled envelopes during Duterte’s tenure as Education secretary, purportedly to influence procurement-related decisions and approvals.
Among those identified was former DepEd Undersecretary for Human Resource and Organizational Development Gloria Jumamil-Mercado, who was designated as Head of Procuring Entity (HOPE) in February 2023.
The impeachment article alleged that Mercado received nine envelopes containing P50,000 each between February and September 2023. The envelopes, reportedly labeled “HOPE,” were allegedly handed over by Assistant Secretary Sunshine Fajarda, who supposedly told Mercado that the money came from Duterte.
Lawmakers claimed the cash was intended to influence Mercado in her role as the official responsible for approving decisions made by the DepEd Bids and Awards Committee.
The complaint further alleged that Mercado later faced pressure to resign after refusing requests from Assistant Secretary Reynold Munsayac, described in the article as a close associate of Duterte, to bypass procurement rules.
According to the impeachment article, former vice presidential chief of staff Zuleika Lopez also allegedly urged Mercado to step down after she refused to compromise procurement procedures.
The complaint likewise cited testimony from DepEd Director IV Resty Osias, who allegedly received four envelopes containing P12,000 to P15,000 in cash between April and September 2023.
Meanwhile, DepEd Chief Accountant Rhunna Catalan allegedly received nine envelopes containing P25,000 each during the same period.
The impeachment article claimed the payments were presented as “allowances” supposedly coming from Duterte. It also noted that such benefits were allegedly not distributed before confidential funds were released to DepEd.
Lawmakers argued that testimonies presented before the House Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability revealed a pattern in which cash distributions were allegedly used to influence officials responsible for procurement and financial approvals.
The complaint accused Duterte of violating provisions of the Revised Penal Code on direct bribery by allegedly giving, or causing the release of, money to public officials in connection with their duties.
The article also cited alleged violations of Republic Act No. 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, claiming the acts induced officials to commit procurement violations that resulted in undue disadvantage to the government and unwarranted benefits to certain parties.
Beyond the corruption allegations, the impeachment complaint accused Duterte of betrayal of public trust, citing Mercado’s testimony that she was allegedly pressured to resign after refusing to compromise procurement regulations.
The article described the alleged use of public funds to influence officials and punish those resisting irregular directives as a misuse of public office that undermined public confidence in government institutions.
Lawmakers also accused Duterte of culpable violation of the Constitution, arguing that the alleged acts violated the constitutional principle requiring public officials to serve with accountability, integrity, and responsibility.
The complaint further alleged that pressure on officials to sign liquidation reports without proper supporting documents weakened the oversight functions of the Commission on Audit and undermined Congress’ authority over public funds.