MANILA, Philippines — The prosecution panel of the House of Representatives has yet to decide whether to present the alleged bagman of Vice President Sara Duterte as a witness in her impeachment trial, the determination depending on evidence already established and facts still needing to be proved, counsel and spokesman Benjamin Tolosa Jr. said Thursday.
Ramil Madriaga, in a supplemental affidavit read during a House Committee on Justice impeachment hearing April 14, 2026 claimed he personally disposed of P125 million in OVP confidential funds in 2022 in less than 24 hours under the vice president’s direct instructions, rather than the previously reported 11 days.
In a virtual press briefing, Tolosa said the prosecution team was reviewing its witness list as it proceeded with Article I involving the alleged misuse of P612.5 million in confidential funds of the Office of the Vice President and Department of Education where Duterte sat as secretary.
“We need to review what we have presented already and, based on our estimation, what are the important matters that we’ve already been able to prove,” Tolosa said, adding that the evaluation applies to all prospective witnesses to avoid repetitive testimony and unnecessary trial days.
The lawyer further noted that the prosecutors first plan was to complete their examination of former OVP special disbursing officer Gina Acosta, who was declared a hostile witness and testified about the planning, withdrawal, transfer and liquidation of confidential funds, including the P125 million she said she turned over to Col. Raymund Dante Lachica upon Duterte’s instruction.
“Let us finish with Acosta’s side first, especially since these are hostile witnesses. We don’t know for sure what they will say,” Tolosa said.
The prosecution also expects to hear from former DepEd special disbursing officer Edward Fajarda and former OVP Assistant Secretary Lemuel Ortonio.
“We need to hear first what all the important admissions we can elicit from her, then Fajarda and then Mr. Ortonio,” Tolosa said.
“After that, just like what we’ve been doing from the start, we’ll assess again who else is needed next. This is based on our assessment of the targets that we still need to meet—evidentiary targets, to be specific—and it will not be based on press-conference rhetoric,” he added.
