August 11, 2026

Cylene May L. Del Campo, a Commission on Audit state auditor and prosecution witness, described post-audit work by the Commission on Audit and its Intelligence and Confidential Funds Audit Office (ICFAO), including audit observation memoranda (AOMs), notices of suspension or disallowance, acknowledgement receipts (ARs), responses, and supporting records.

For the Office of the Vice President, Cylene May L. Del Campo testified that an earlier Commission on Audit notice of disallowance totaled ₱73.287 million: ₱69.787 million in reward payments and ₱3.5 million for tables, chairs, desktop computers, and printers. She also testified that one amount contained a typographical error, that the notice was affirmed on petition for review, and that a subsequent motion for reconsideration remained pending. These matters are reported as testimony, not independently verified fact.

For a later Office of the Vice President notice of disallowance dated March 31, 2026, Cylene May L. Del Campo testified that the total was ₱375 million for the three quarters of 2023. In explaining the basis for that notice, she separately described ₱261.3 million as disallowed for reward payments, supplies or medical and food aid, and a purchase-of-information payment. The digest does not treat ₱261.3 million as a second notice total.

In describing the later Office of the Vice President audit, Cylene May L. Del Campo attributed ₱62 million to reward payments that lacked documents evidencing success, ₱199 million to supplies or medical and food aid whose purposes could not be ascertained from the acknowledgement receipts, and ₱300,000 to a purchase-of-information payment made before release of the cash advance.

For the Department of Education's first and second quarters, Cylene May L. Del Campo testified that the records were compliant during her evaluation and that the Commission on Audit issued credit notices; she said a settled account could still be reopened under the stated rules.

Cylene May L. Del Campo described the Department of Education's third-quarter audit observation memorandum as identifying missing payment-support documents, ₱6.371 million in reward payments unsupported by documents evidencing success, missing descriptions of specific confidential activities, missing periods or durations in disbursement vouchers, and a purchase-of-information expense related to car-loan scams. She said the response remained under review and evaluation.

The prosecution pointed to a tabulation that it said showed Department of Education (DepEd) special disbursing officer Edward Fajarda issuing payments on August 9, 2023, to recipients in several locations. Cylene May L. Del Campo identified Edward Fajarda as the SDO and said the submissions contained no separate authorization showing that another person was authorized to disburse the funds.

Cylene May L. Del Campo characterized an alleged Office of the Vice President or Department of Education transfer as violating item 6.1.1 of Joint Circular 2015-01, which she said prohibited transfer from one accountable officer to another. Atty. Kristine R. Ferrer disputed the exact admissions and characterization.

The hearing opened with appearances by Rep. Joel R. Chua for the prosecution and Atty. Kristine R. Ferrer for respondent Vice President Sara Zimmerman Duterte. Sen. Francis “Chiz” Escudero, the presiding officer, then recognized Atty. Lorna Patajo-Kapunan, counsel for the prosecution, to continue examining the witness.

The parties argued over whether to compare thousands of acknowledgement receipts in advance. The prosecution described 4,492 documents across the OVP and DepEd; the defense said authenticity and the witness's competence would be for the court to assess after formal offer and testimony.

Cylene May L. Del Campo testified about Commission on Audit post-audit work, Joint Circular 2015-01, Office of the Vice President liquidation documents, Department of Education audit observations, and the status of the Department of Education's third-quarter response.

The chair deferred the defense cross-examination to August 12, stated that counsel could use the respondent's copies of the acknowledgement receipts, and later adjourned the trial until August 12 at 10 a.m.

The chair permitted Cylene May L. Del Campo to proceed using summaries and tabulations, subject to the defense's opportunity to comment and cross-examine; this interim procedure did not resolve the separate dispute over the authenticity or identification of the underlying acknowledgement receipts.

The chair declined to have Cylene May L. Del Campo answer a question requiring a factual conclusion, directed counsel to proceed, and said the issue remained unresolved pending later proceedings. The chair then asked a clarifying question about whether Joint Circular 2015-01 authorized only the designated special disbursing officer to disburse the funds.

The chair stated that Atty. Kristine R. Ferrer could cross-examine Cylene May L. Del Campo using the respondent's copies of the acknowledgement receipts and deferred that cross-examination to the following day.

Sen. Juan Miguel “Migz” Zubiri's proposed change to the legislative and impeachment-court schedule was not adopted during the session. The chair said any adjustment would be considered after notice to the parties and caucus discussion, not during that week.

The trial was adjourned until August 12 at 10 a.m., with the defense cross-examination still pending.

Sen. Juan Miguel “Migz” Zubiri moved to suggest that legislative sessions begin at 10 a.m. and impeachment-court proceedings at 3 p.m., so that legislative business would not interrupt evidence presentation and cross-examination. He said he wanted to make the proposal a proper motion.

Sen. Pia S. Cayetano requested that the scheduling matter return to caucus because the Senate had previously discussed the issue and the minority floor leader was absent.

Sen. Camille Villar argued that the scheduling matter should receive the same caucus consideration as earlier proposals and should not be changed immediately.

Atty. Lorna Patajo-Kapunan argued that the prosecution had been forced to present summaries and tabulations because the defense had not stipulated to the 4,492 acknowledgement receipts, while maintaining that the defense could raise objections at formal offer.

The prosecution elicited testimony that a list submitted to support reward payments did not show the particular accomplishment required as proof of successful information-gathering activity.

Atty. Lorna Patajo-Kapunan asked whether Cylene May L. Del Campo viewed the alleged transfers from designated disbursing officers to other people as inconsistent with Joint Circular 2015-01; Del Campo answered that such transfers violated the rule against transferring funds between accountable officers.

Atty. Kristine R. Ferrer said the defense had not stipulated to the authenticity of the exhibits or to Cylene May L. Del Campo's competence to identify them, and that those matters belonged in open-court examination and formal offer.

The defense objected that the witness was incompetent to answer questions calling for a conclusion about the listed locations and the alleged movement of funds.

Atty. Kristine R. Ferrer disputed the prosecution's characterization of the acknowledgement-receipt procedure. The prosecution had said that authenticity was deemed established if the parties agreed to dispense with identification, but Ferrer later denied that there had been any such agreement or admission.

The chair said: "So that remains to be seen and proven in the coming days."

Atty. Kristine R. Ferrer stated: "no such admission, Your Honor, and there was no dispensing of identification of the ARs."

The defense had not yet cross-examined Cylene May L. Del Campo when the hearing ended. The chair said the cross-examination could use respondent counsel Atty. Kristine R. Ferrer's copies of the acknowledgement receipts.

The authenticity and identification of the acknowledgement receipts remained disputed. The prosecution said authenticity was deemed established through an agreement to dispense with identification; Atty. Kristine R. Ferrer denied that agreement.

The witness said the Department of Education's third-quarter response remained under evaluation and review, with further internal review still required.

Cylene May L. Del Campo said a credit notice may be reopened within three years if the transaction is tainted by fraud or collusion or if new material evidence is discovered; that testimony described a rule, not a final court finding on any transaction.

The transcript renders the name associated with an alleged transfer inconsistently as Colonel Raymond Dante Pilachica and “Colonel La Chica”; this digest preserves the ambiguity. It does not supply a first name for Colonel Nolasco.