“Why only now?”
House impeachment prosecutor Joel Chua, congressman for Manila’s 3rd District, asked this question after Vice President Sara Duterte said she will address the issue of supposed confidential funds misuse during the impeachment trial.
“It’s a good thing na at least mapapaliwanag na nila. Dahil matagal na naman na natin inaantay yung paliwanag nila,” Chua said.
“Sana noong committee hearing, pinaliwanag na nila at hindi na humaba nang ganito yung issue tungkol sa confidential fund. So why only now?” he added.
(It’s a good thing because at least they will be able to explain it. Because we have been waiting for their explanation for a long time. If only they had explained it during the committee hearing, then we wouldn’t have ended up at this point.)
The vice president also said she will answer the allegations in public in case there will be no trial.
In response to Duterte’s ally Senator Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa’s saying he will question the jurisdiction of the Senate in the 20th Congress over the Articles of Impeachment that were transmitted during the 19th Congress, Chua said, “Irerespeto natin kung anuman ang ninanais ni ating butihing senador, Senator Bato dela Rosa. Sana nga lang ito ay ginagawa nila nang walang kinikilingan.”
(We respect whatever the good senator wishes to do. We just hope that it is done without favor to anyone.)
The impeachment prosecutor also maintained that the 20th Congress has jurisdiction over the Articles of Impeachment.
“Ako po naniniwala mayroon po jurisdiction dahil sinasabi ko nga po at ito po yung aming stand, na ito po nga Senate ay continuing body. At yun po ay mananatiling stand po namin,” Chua explained.
(I believe there is jurisdiction because, and this is our stand, the Senate is a continuing body. And that will continue to be our stand.)
He also issued a challenge to the vice president and her supporters.
“Kung sila po ay naniniwala na wala naman pong masamang ginawa, ito po yung pagkakataon para malinis po yung pangalan ng impeachable officer,” Chua said.
(If they believe that they have done nothing wrong, then this is their opportunity to clear the name of the impeachable officer.)
Chua also said that the unmodified opinion given by the Commission Audit to the Office of the Vice President for the year 2024 does not mean there were no irregularities.
“Iba naman po yung nilalabas po nila ngayon kaysa sa dati. So tingnan na lang po natin dahil unang-una po, yung issue po nung yung mga dokumento po na galing po sa amin, at yung nag-issue po sa kanila ng notice of disallowance ay galing din sa COA,” Chua said.
(What they are putting out now is different from what was before. So let’s look into it because, first of all, the issue of the documents is from us, and the notice of disallowance they received is also from COA.)
“Dahil tinanong din po namin sa committee hearing ang COA, doon sa committee hearing ng Committee on Appropriations na bakit sila nagiging, kung anong ibig sabihin ng notice of disallowance. So sinasabi nga po nila, meron daw problema sa paggamit,” he added.
(We asked COA during the committee of appropriations hearing what the notice of disallowance meant, and they said they had problems with the fund use [of the OVP].)
Chua also reiterated that the House Prosecution Panel has a strong case.
“Hindi lang naman ang issue sa impeachment ay hindi lang naman naka-focus sa confidential funds. Marami pong issue na nakalahad po sa iba’t ibang articles po ng impeachment complaint,” he stressed.
(The issue of impeachment is not just focused on the confidential funds. There are a lot of issues laid out in the articles of the impeachment complaint.) — BM, GMA Integrated News
