EXCLUSIVE: Behind the Complaint Against VP Sara Duterte – Plunder, Confidential Funds, and a Brewing Political Storm

By Balitang Huli | December 16, 2025

MANILA — In a move that has reignited national debate over transparency and accountability in government, a coalition of civil society leaders filed formal complaints before the Office of the Ombudsman last Friday, December 12, 2025, accusing Vice President Sara Duterte and 15 other officials from the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and the Department of Education (DepEd) of plunder, bribery, graft, and malversation—all allegedly tied to the controversial use of P612.5 million in confidential funds.

But what prompted this explosive legal action? Who are the key players behind the complaint? And what truths lie beneath the surface of this high-stakes political filing?

The Spark: Confidential Funds Under Scrutiny

The controversy centers on the allocation and utilization of confidential funds—a type of budget typically reserved for intelligence-gathering or national security operations—granted to the OVP and DepEd during the 2022 and 2023 fiscal years.

While Vice President Duterte has maintained that these funds were spent “within the bounds of the law” and primarily for “intelligence and security operations,” critics argue that the sheer scale and lack of detailed public accounting raise serious red flags.

Notably, the P612.5 million figure includes:

• P500 million in confidential funds allocated to the OVP in 2022—unprecedented for a non-security agency.
• P112.5 million awarded to DepEd in 2023, when Duterte concurrently served as Secretary of Education (she resigned from the post in June 2024).

Both allocations bypassed the usual scrutiny of the House Committee on Appropriations and drew rebuke from budget watchdogs, opposition lawmakers, and transparency advocates.

Who Filed the Complaint—and Why Now?

The complaint was jointly filed by a coalition led by:

• Samahan ng mga Nagtataguyod ng Reporma at Katarungang Panlipunan (SNRK)
• Transparency International Philippines
• Former Commission on Audit (COA) officials
• Legal scholars from the University of the Philippines and Ateneo de Manila

According to Atty. Maricel De Guzman, one of the petitioners, the timing is critical: “We’ve waited for official audit reports and public disclosures that never came. With the 2025 national budget debates underway, we cannot allow unchecked confidential spending to become the new normal.”

Sources within the legal team tell Balitang Huli that the move follows months of internal review of COA observations, whistleblower testimonies, and discrepancies in disbursement records. Though full documents remain sealed pending Ombudsman review, insiders say the complaint zeroes in on vaguely itemized expenses, lack of liquidation reports, and questionable procurement patterns involving unnamed private contractors.

Frontliners in the Allegations

While the complaint names 16 individuals, three figures stand out:

1. Vice President Sara Duterte – Primary respondent, accused of authorizing irregular disbursements.
2. Atty. Zuleika T. Lopez – OVP Chief of Staff, cited for operational oversight of fund use.
3. Undersecretary for Finance, DepEd – Not named publicly yet, but accused of facilitating fund transfers without proper documentation.

Notably, no military or intelligence officials are named—fueling skepticism over whether these funds were genuinely used for national security, as claimed.

The Defense: “National Security” vs. Public Accountability

In a brief statement issued through her spokesperson, VP Duterte dismissed the complaint as “politically motivated” and reiterated that all expenditures underwent internal auditing and were aligned with “executive privilege on security matters.”

However, legal experts counter that executive privilege cannot override anti-graft laws—especially when public funds are involved.

“Confidential does not mean lawless,” said constitutional law professor Dr. Reynaldo Cruz. “The Ombudsman has the authority—and duty—to investigate, regardless of classification.”

What Happens Next?

The Ombudsman now has 15 days to determine whether the complaint warrants a preliminary investigation. If it proceeds, respondents will be required to submit counter-affidavits. A finding of probable cause could lead to administrative or criminal charges, including possible suspension from office.

Political analysts warn this could escalate into a constitutional crisis, especially if the case intersects with broader investigations into confidential fund usage across other agencies—including the Office of the President.

---

Balitang Huli Verdict:
Whether this complaint is a legitimate cry for accountability or a calculated political strike remains hotly contested. But one thing is clear: the public’s demand for transparency over how P612.5 million of taxpayer money was spent will not fade quietly. As the Ombudsman weighs its next move, the nation watches—and waits.

Stay tuned to Balitang Huli for live updates, expert analysis, and exclusive sources as this story unfolds.

#DuterteConfidentialFunds #OmbudsmanComplaint #BalitangHuliExclusive