New audit issues in OVP’s ₱168-M relief drive spark fund use concerns

MANILA, Philippines — Questions surrounding alleged unidentified or inadequately documented beneficiaries in the Office of the Vice President’s (OVP) ₱168-million disaster-relief operations have revived comparisons to controversial names previously linked to the office’s confidential fund records.

During a press briefing on Wednesday, House prosecution panel adviser and spokesperson Robert Ace Barbers highlighted a Commission on Audit (COA) special review that pointed out documentation deficiencies, which prevented state auditors from verifying beneficiaries and distributions in the OVP’s 2023 disaster-relief programs.

“You might be surprised if the recipient of the aid there turns out to be Mary Grace Piattos again, or perhaps Nico Harina,” Barbers said in Filipino. “That would be difficult. If it’s them again, they must be regular clients by now.”

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: After ‘Mary Grace Piattos, a ‘Piatos’ emerges in OVP secret fund issue

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

Barbers clarified that his remark did not establish that either name appeared in the disaster-relief records, and the audit findings cited during the briefing did not identify Piattos or Harina as relief beneficiaries.

The two names originally surfaced in documents submitted to account for the OVP’s confidential fund expenditures, which form part of the evidence in the ongoing impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.

Verification from the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) presented during the proceedings showed no matching civil registry record for “Mary Grace Piattos.” Duterte’s defense team has maintained that the names listed in confidential fund records were aliases connected to sensitive operations.

Barbers emphasized that the latest COA findings make it critical to establish a complete documentary trail for the ₱168-million relief fund.

Article continues after this advertisement

“The audit trail is important because this involves ₱168 million. Again, this is public money, and every single peso spent must be clear and fully accounted for,” Barbers said. “If you say this is financial aid, who was it for? What was it for?”

He added that while the OVP has been given the opportunity under the standard audit process to provide explanations and supporting documents, “absent all these justifications, there is really a question mark.”