Tulfo: Use of CF aliases forgivable, but similar signatures questionable

Sen. Raffy Tulfo.INQUIRER PHOTO / NIÑO JESUS ORBETA MANILA, Philippines — While the use of aliases for the supposed payees of confidential funds (CF) could be forgivable, the signatures and handwriting on acknowledgment receipts (ARs) that appeared similar were “very questionable,” Senator-judge Raffy Tulfo said on Monday. Tulfo’s statement came as the prosecution team in Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial presented Assistant National Statistician Marizza Grande of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), its 11th witness for Article I of the Articles of Impeachment. Grande’s testimony centered on the “unusual” or “unique” names of individuals who signed as payees on the ARs used by the Office of the Vice President (OVP) and the Department of Education (DepEd) to liquidate their P612.5 million in confidential funds. Article continues after this advertisement READ: WATCH: Sara Duterte impeachment trial | Sept. 7, 2026 “Makakalusot pa sa akin ‘yun bang gagamit ng alias, kasi nga naman siyempre as an informant, especially giving intelligence information or confidential information, siguro allowed sila na gumamit ng alias to protect their identity para hindi sila masunog, ika nga,” Tulfo said in his manifestation during Monday’s trial, (Using an alias can still get past me, because, of course, as an informant, especially when giving intelligence or confidential information, I suppose they’re allowed to use an alias to protect their identity so they don’t get exposed, so to speak.) “Pero ‘yung bang pirma ng bawat, ng ilang mga informants po doon, pare-pareho, tapos ‘yung handwriting, ‘yung pagfi-fill up ng mga pangalan doon, pare-pareho, ibig sabihin iisang tao lang. So ‘yun ay very questionable for me,” he added. (But the signatures of several of the informants there are all the same, and the handwriting used to fill out the names is also the same. That means it was just one person. So that is very questionable for me.) Article continues after this advertisement Prior to this, Grande testified before the impeachment court that there were supposed payees whose names matched the PSA’s records, including a certain Miko Alquizar and Beatrice Cuenca who appeared to both be one year-old in 2023, the year indicated in the ARs. READ: Duterte trial Day 22: PSA official to testify on CF payees’ identities Article continues after this advertisement Tulfo asked whether the prosecution team tried to trace the identities of the supposed payees, alleging that it was possible that their parents had signed the ARs. Prosecution counsel Mae Divinagracia responded saying that they did not do so because they had limited time to track the whereabouts of the supposed payees. Tulfo said that even the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) use aliases to protect their informants. “In my humble opinion, aliases lang ‘tong mga ginamit nila, at ‘yung mga nagkakatugma-tugma sa mga birth certificate, ‘yun ay chamba lamang,” the senator-judge said. (In my humble opinion, these are just aliases that they used, and the names that matched the birth certificates were merely a coincidence.) Tulfo then reiterated that the signatures on the payees’ names such as ‘Pagong’ and ‘Pusa’ appeared the same. “And I’m very sure, habang finifill-upan nila ‘yung mga pangalan na ‘yun, nagtatawanan ‘yun, ginagawa tayong mga kengkoy. ‘Yung mga tao diyan sa DepEd saka mga tao diyan sa OVP,” he went on. (And I’m very sure that while they were filling out those names, they were laughing, making fools of us. These people here at DepEd and the people here at the OVP.) Divinagracia then answered that if the names were indeed aliases, “the defense should have, at the earliest opportunity, already indicated that in their answer.” She explained that because there was no mention of the names being aliases, they had the payees’ names validated with the PSA. Defense counsel Justin Gular, meanwhile, responded that the Commission on Audit (COA)’s findings on the confidential funds did not include the names of the payees or the use of aliases as a point of concern. READ: Sara Duterte impeachment trial: Who is lawyer Justin Gular? “There was nothing to respond to,” Gular said. “Your Honor, the fact remains at this point of the proceedings, and even at the time the articles of impeachment was filed, is that the prosecution had the burden of proof to explain and prove every allegation. If they are now claiming that these are aliases, the burden is with them, not with the defense,” he added. Tulfo then said that it is important to call Col. Raymund Dante Lachica and Col. Dennis Nolasco, the supposed security officers of the OVP and DepEd, as witnesses to uncover the truth about the said names. Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again. Your subscription has been successful. Lachica and Nolasco were the ones identified by the Special Disbursing Officers of the two agencies as the ones who “implemented” the confidential funds. /jpv