OVP Paid P70,000 for Medicines to 'Mary Grace Piattos' at VP Sara Duterte Trial

In a recent ANC 24/7 report titled "Acknowledgment receipt shows 'Mary Grace Piattos' received P70,000 for medicines," the Senate impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte took center stage once more this week. The recap detailed how an acknowledgment receipt from the Office of the Vice President listed a P70,000 payment to an individual named Mary Grace Piattos for medicines, presented as a reward under confidential fund rules. This development comes as the Senate sits as an Impeachment Court examining alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds from the OVP and the Department of Education.

OVP Paid P70,000 for Medicines to 'Mary Grace Piattos' — Receipt Shown at VP Sara Duterte Impeachment Trial

Manila, Philippines — The acknowledgment receipt now sits at the center of the Senate impeachment court's scrutiny, connecting a single P70,000 entry to a broader pattern of confidential fund spending that prosecutors say bypassed the rules.

The Senate Trial Enters Its Second Month

The trial opened at 2 p.m. on Monday, July 6, 2026, with Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding over the proceedings against Vice President Sara Duterte. She stands as the first Philippine official impeached twice by the House of Representatives. The charges center on the alleged misuse of P125 million in OVP confidential funds for 2022 and P375 million for 2023, plus DepEd confidential funds during her time as secretary. House prosecutors argue these funds were systematically misappropriated through questionable liquidation practices.

VP Duterte has not appeared in the Senate chamber on trial days. She left for an overseas trip on July 16 and returned to the Philippines in early August, describing the process as bending the law. On August 5, 2026, the Supreme Court dismissed petitions that questioned the legitimacy of the impeachment proceedings, allowing the trial to continue without interruption.

The Commission on Audit has already issued a notice of disallowance that requires the Office of the Vice President to return P73 million. Under Joint Circular 2015-01, any expenditure lacking proper documentation can trigger repayment demands that directly affect agency budgets. The Senate impeachment court now faces the task of deciding whether these disallowances serve as binding evidence or open the door to extended appeals that stretch the proceedings further.

Filipinos in provinces far from Manila should monitor how the trial outcome influences future budget releases for health centers and classrooms that depend on the same tax revenues now under review. The Marcos-Duterte rift continues to shape alliances ahead of the 2025 midterms aftermath, while international scrutiny from the ICC on the Duterte family adds another layer of attention to the domestic focus on fund accountability. Past confidential fund cases show similar disputes often dragged on for years before any repayment occurred, leaving communities without restored resources.

Atty. Roderick Wamil Details OVP Spending Violations

Former state auditor Atty. Roderick Wamil of the Commission on Audit's Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office testified on Day 11, Monday, August 3, 2026. Under direct examination by private lawyer Lorna Kapunan, supervised by House prosecutors, Wamil explained how the OVP failed to follow Joint Circular 2015-01 on confidential fund use. He noted that the OVP's December 2022 physical and financial plan did not list specific confidential activities as required under item 4.2 of the circular.

Wamil further testified that the OVP liquidated its entire P125 million confidential fund allocation for 2022 within just 11 days in December. The office submitted only acknowledgment receipts rather than sales invoices or official receipts. A disbursement voucher dated December 20, 2022, covered calendar year 2022 expenditures, another violation of the circular's timing rules. Wamil confirmed that the COA Notice of Disallowance requiring the OVP to return P73 million remains enforceable unless the Supreme Court issues a temporary restraining order.

Joint Circular 2015-01 treats the entire amount as unaccounted when detailed activity listings are absent, shifting the burden back to the agency. This standard has forced full repayment in earlier confidential fund cases after COA disallowance, and the Senate impeachment court must now decide whether to uphold that approach or allow exceptions that could weaken future audits.

The Marcos-Duterte rift turns budget oversight into another arena of tension following the 2025 midterms aftermath. Rushed liquidations in past controversies often led to prolonged legal battles without immediate recovery of funds for public use, and the current testimony on missing plans and timing violations follows that same pattern.

The P70,000 Receipt for Mary Grace Piattos

During his testimony, Wamil highlighted an acknowledgment receipt showing the OVP paid P70,000 to Mary Grace Piattos for medicines, recorded as a reward. He stated this expenditure did not qualify under authorized confidential fund uses, which exclude rewards for medicines, food assistance, furniture, incentives, and general travel expenses. The prosecution presented 15 boxes of confidential fund documents to support these claims on Day 11.

Wamil added that more than P200 million in combined OVP and DepEd confidential funds lacked proper supporting documents across multiple days of testimony. On Day 13, Wednesday, August 5, 2026, he told senator-judges that a certification from Colonel Raymund Lachica of the Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group did not satisfy Joint Circular 2015-01 requirements because it failed to show meritorious information gathered by paid informants.

The P70,000 entry for medicines shows how even small amounts outside the guidelines can trigger broader scrutiny of entire fund allocations. The COA disallowance process can force repayment when expenditures fall outside Joint Circular 2015-01 rules, and the Senate impeachment court must determine whether this sets clearer boundaries that protect future public service budgets.

Communities in Quezon City and Cebu continue to feel the effects when resources meant for local needs remain tied up in ongoing reviews. Repeated patterns of rushed documentation in earlier confidential fund controversies delayed recovery of misused amounts, and the current list of unsupported entries follows that same path.

Other Aliases and Amounts Flagged in Testimony

Prosecutors listed additional recipients with codenames or aliases during the August 3 session. These included Renan Piattos for P110,000 labeled as information, Nova Santos for P85,000 for various goods, and Mico Harina for P295,000 for purchased supplies. Further names were Janice Marie Revilla for P70,000, Patty Ting for P150,000, Andi/y Lim for P50,000, Alejandro Pikit for P90,000, Feonna Biong for P80,000, Sisfrunio Balsac for P70,000, and Gabriel Bisaya for P70,000, all tied to information or supplies.

VP Duterte signed the OVP liquidation documents certifying that the P125 million cash advance had been accomplished. Her signature appeared on disbursement vouchers, accomplishment reports, and certifications, though these lacked details of specific confidential activities. On Day 12, Tuesday, August 4, 2026, Wamil returned to the stand to address additional gaps in documentation for the 2023 funds.

Missing activity details can render entire certifications invalid under COA disallowance rules and Joint Circular 2015-01. The Senate impeachment court must weigh signatures on incomplete documents against the need for verifiable intelligence outcomes, and the volume of alias-based entries raises questions about how such liquidations hold up under audit standards.

Alias-based liquidations in earlier confidential fund controversies often prolonged disputes without restoring funds to affected agencies. Workers and students in provinces from Davao to Baguio feel the ongoing impact when unverified expenditures reduce available resources for essential services.

Defense Counsel Raises Procedural Objections

Defense counsel Kristine Ferrer declined to stipulate that acknowledgment receipts for the OVP's P375 million confidential funds in 2023 could serve as common evidence. She argued the defense needed time to compare its copies with those submitted by prosecutors. The defense also opposed the prosecution's request for the court to take judicial notice of earlier House committee inquiries into OVP budget use.

Senator-judge Raffy Tulfo raised questions about a possible conflict of interest involving defense counsel Michael Poa, who served as DepEd Undersecretary and spokesperson during Duterte's tenure at the department. These objections slowed the pace of evidence presentation but did not halt the trial proceedings.

Procedural disputes test how strictly the Senate impeachment court applies Joint Circular 2015-01 and COA disallowance standards. Extended timelines from these objections could delay any potential recovery of funds for public programs, and the court must balance defense preparation needs against the push for timely resolution.

Procedural challenges in previous confidential fund controversies often extended cases for years without resolving underlying documentation gaps. Residents in barangays across the country continue to track whether trial outcomes restore resources to health centers and schools that lost support during the original expenditures.

Filipino Taxpayers Bear the Weight of Unaccounted Funds

The testimony about P70,000 paid to Mary Grace Piattos and similar entries affects ordinary Filipino families who rely on public services funded by taxes. When confidential funds meant for intelligence work instead cover unverified rewards or supplies, barangay health centers and public schools in places like Quezon City and Cebu lose resources that could have supported medicines or classroom needs. Workers and students in provinces from Davao to Baguio feel the ripple effects when P612.5 million moves without proper invoices.

OFWs who send remittances home expect those taxes to build stronger communities, not disappear into acknowledgment receipts. The bayanihan spirit that binds neighborhoods weakens when public trust erodes over unliquidated millions. Malacañang has urged senator-judges to remain impartial as pressure builds on the vice president to address the accusations directly.

Unresolved amounts tied to COA disallowance and Joint Circular 2015-01 could reduce future agency allocations for basic services. The trial outcome will shape budget transparency rules that affect daily life in communities, and prolonged disputes from earlier confidential fund cases left local governments without restored funding for years.

Public Reaction Spreads Across Social Media

The alias names trended online under #SaraOnTrial, with users expressing disbelief at entries like Mary Grace Piattos and Mico Harina. Political commentator Jesus Falcis posted that Mico Harina received P295,000 for supplies, turning the names into points of public discussion. Political scientist Richard Heydarian shared screenshots of the aliases alongside comments about corruption. Actor Bart Guingona noted that invented names such as Piattos and Andy Lim treated public money as a joke.

House prosecutor and ML Party-list Representative Leila de Lima asked during the trial who exactly received the confidential funds, pointing to the list of names. The viral spread reached communities across Manila and beyond, prompting conversations in sari-sari stores and jeepney routes about accountability for government spending.

Public discussion highlights COA disallowance risks and Joint Circular 2015-01 compliance gaps. Social media pressure may influence senator-judges to prioritize evidence over procedural delays, and these conversations feed into wider debates about institutional trust.

Public attention in earlier confidential fund controversies often sustained calls for reform long after initial testimony ended. Communities from Manila to the provinces continue to discuss these issues in everyday settings, reinforcing expectations that government spending must serve verifiable public needs.

By Bella Reyes, Staff Writer

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Reporting is based on sources cited in the article.