INTERIOR Secretary Jonvic Remulla said Monday that authorities would seriously investigate the allegations of dismissed police officer Rodulfo Gracioso Jr. that he delivered billions of pesos in cash to Vice President Sara Duterte, and her father and brother on the instructions of then-speaker Lord Allan Velasco.
Remulla said Gracioso’s disclosures would be examined to establish the truth, including whether the former policeman should be considered for admission to the government’s witness protection program.
“We will take all of these statements in all seriousness, so we will know what is the truth,” Remulla said in an interview.
The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) is investigating Gracioso’s allegations, while the Department of Justice (DOJ) is evaluating his sworn affidavit.
NBI Director Melvin Matibag said Gracioso had undergone a polygraph examination and that some of his statements had been validated through other means. Matibag, however, did not say that the validation had established the truth of all of Gracioso’s allegations.
Justice Secretary Fredderick Vida said the DOJ had also received Gracioso’s affidavit.
Gracioso claimed in his affidavit that he delivered more than P2 billion in cash to Duterte in more than 20 transactions, with individual deliveries ranging from P20 million to P50 million.
He said the money was transported in suitcases and delivered at various locations in Metro Manila, Davao and other areas, allegedly upon Velasco’s instructions.
Gracioso also alleged that he delivered more than P1 billion to then-president Rodrigo Duterte from 2018 to 2022 and brought a suitcase containing P100 million to Davao City 1st District Rep. Paolo Duterte.
Vice President Duterte has denied knowing Gracioso or receiving money from him, while Velasco’s camp has rejected the allegations as fabricated.
The PNP, meanwhile, confirmed that Gracioso had indeed served as part of Velasco’s security detail.
PNP chief Gen. Jose Melencio Nartatez Jr. said Gracioso was assigned to Velasco while the latter was a congressman and later became House speaker.
Gracioso had claimed that he became Velasco’s head of security in 2018 and continued in the role when Velasco became speaker from 2020 to 2022.
Nartatez also disclosed that Gracioso had faced a criminal case and administrative proceedings dating back to 2022, when he was assigned to the Police Regional Office-4A (Calabarzon).
“Gracioso had been investigated, an administrative case, and there is a corresponding criminal case filed against him,” Nartatez said.
The administrative proceedings eventually resulted in Gracioso’s dismissal from the PNP, Nartatez said. He added that the former policeman had previously served a suspension related to the case.
PNP records also showed that Gracioso had been disciplined several times before his dismissal, including at least three suspensions and a demotion.
His dismissal was covered by an order dated Sept. 15 and took effect Sept. 11. He was dismissed on three counts of grave misconduct, with the penalty also carrying the forfeiture of his retirement benefits and disqualification from reemployment in government.
The dismissal came as Gracioso publicly made allegations involving Velasco and the Duterte family.
A spokesman for Velasco denied Gracioso’s allegations.
Impeachment case
Meanwhile, prosecutors in Vice President Duterte’s impeachment trial said Gracioso’s revelations could be used in their presentation.
Prosecution adviser and former Surigao del Norte congressman Robert Ace Barbers said the ex-policeman’s sworn testimony could be included in their presentation of Article II touching on the supposed unexplained wealth of the vice president, but only if it would be backed by corroborative evidence.
“Let’s wait for the conclusion of the investigation being conducted by the NBI,” Barbers said in Filipino in a press conference.
“The NBI is currently determining whether there is sufficient evidence to substantiate the testimony provided by Mr. Gracioso. They are checking if there is evidence to back up the statement he gave to the National Bureau of Investigation; if Mr. Gracioso’s claims prove to be true, they could be considered as evidence regarding this article. Should that happen, it would provide additional information to support the allegations made in the article,” he added.
House prosecutor and Manila 3rd District Rep. Joel Chua said they are looking at the matter with caution as they were “surprised” by the timing of Gracioso’s testimony to the NBI.
“While it is very timely — given that current issues could be said to be connected to this — naturally, Gracioso’s statements require a measure of caution and careful study,” Chua said.
“We will first study the affidavit he submitted. We will authenticate his photographs and evidence. We will examine the corroborative evidence he provided to assess the weight of his testimony. In short, we cannot simply dismiss or disregard this. However, if we do consider it, we will do so with caution,” he added.
The prosecution panel rejected suggestions that it planned Gracioso’s disclosure.
Gracioso’s claims emerged only after the impeachment articles had been transmitted to the Senate and could not be used to add a new article.
Asked whether Velasco should be included in an NBI case build-up, Barbers said investigators were focused on whether evidence supported Gracioso’s affidavit.
