A Commission on Audit (COA) official clarified on Wednesday that reward payments and information purchases operate under distinct auditing standards during the Senate impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte.
Defense panel member Atty. Kristine Ferrer questioned state auditor Xylene Mae del Campo on why protective intelligence reports showing zero untoward incidents during the Vice President’s activities were insufficient to justify reward payments.
Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero intervened to highlight the distinction between the two types of disbursements.
“Ibahin natin ang payment for reward at payment for information. Ang payment for reward, iyon ang hinahanapan mo ng success?” Escudero asked.
Del Campo agreed, confirming she did not demand proof of successful operations to validate information purchases, noting that those specific disbursements were not disallowed.
“Hindi po na-disallow iyong purchase of information,” Del Campo said.
When asked what constitutes “proof of success” for rewards, Del Campo explained that she sought documentation proving a flagged potential threat was apprehended. The defense argued that confidential operations are successful if they successfully prevent harm, regardless of whether an arrest occurs.
Escudero questioned whether Joint Circular No. 2015-01 explicitly requires an arrest to validate a reward payment.
“Nakalagay ba sa Joint Memorandum Circular 2015-01 na kailangang may mahuli para maging successful ang isang pagbibigay ng reward or information?” Escudero asked.
“Ang nakalagay lang, proof of success of information gathering and/or surveillance,” Del Campo conceded, acknowledging the circular lacks an explicit arrest mandate.
Pressed on whether the arrest requirement was her personal interpretation, Del Campo stated it stemmed from her professional assessment and past auditing experience.
“Base iyon sa aking professional judgment and based on evaluation ng documents… based sa joint circular,” she explained.
“Doon sa mga ibang na-audit ko, ang ina-attach po talaga nila sa payment of rewards ay may mga nahuli po,” Del Campo added.
Escudero noted that while the regulation mandates proof of success, its actual text does not strictly require an apprehension.