Chel Diokno and Marian Rivera Listed in OVP Confidential Funds Scandal?

 

Public Trust on Trial: Calls for Transparency Mount Amidst OVP Confidential Funds Controversy

MANILA, Philippines – The clamor for greater transparency and accountability in government spending has reached a fever pitch as new allegations emerge regarding the recipients of confidential funds from the Office of the Vice President (OVP). The latest names to surface, those of prominent human rights lawyer Chel Diokno and actress Marian Rivera, have further fueled public demand for a thorough investigation, with many asserting that the Filipino people deserve to see the evidence to unearth potential abuses of public coffers.

The controversy stems from an ongoing narrative surrounding the alleged misuse of confidential funds, initially characterized by seemingly innocuous code names, even "chichirya" (snack food) names, in official receipts. However, the recent revelation of seemingly legitimate public figures linked to these funds has intensified calls for concrete verification.

Congressman Zia Alonto Adiong of Lanao del Sur's First District, and House Assistant Majority Leader, addressed these concerns in a recent interview. While emphasizing the need for confirmation from agencies like the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) and the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), Congressman Adiong acknowledged the public emergence of names such as Marian Rivera and Chel Diokno.

"I also don't believe that the Chel Diokno mentioned is the congressman-elect," Adiong stated, referring to the initial skepticism surrounding the more prominent figures. He further conceded the possibility of common names regarding "Marian Rivera," but stressed the necessity for official verification.

This sentiment echoes previous concerns raised during good governance hearings, where numerous acknowledgement receipts displayed inconsistencies – identical names with different signatures, different names with identical signatures, and even identical names receiving funds from different locations. These discrepancies prompted requests for assistance from the PSA and NBI to verify the existence and legitimacy of these individuals.

"In the case of these two additional names that popped up, Chel Diokno and Marian Rivera, we also want to know if there's someone else with the same name as Congressman-elect Chel Diokno who exists," Adiong explained. "Otherwise, this will reinforce the allegation that the confidential funds were used and abused in a manner where the recipients were not genuine or the people who received them were not real."

A critical point of contention revolves around the confirmation of whether these individuals, even if they genuinely exist, actually received confidential funds. Congressman Adiong highlighted that if these individuals are proven to be real persons, the next step would be for authorities to reach out to them directly to confirm receipt of the funds. This is particularly crucial given the two defined uses of confidential funds: purchasing information or rewarding informants.

The issue is further complicated by the use of "code names" in some documentation. While acknowledging that intelligence committees may utilize code names for informant safety, Adiong underscored that corresponding real names should be attached to these receipts, at least for auditing purposes by the Commission on Audit (COA). The absence of such corresponding documents has led to disallowances, raising questions about the authenticity of these "code names."

"How would we be able to know if these code names actually have real names in real life?" Adiong posed. He noted that the COA should have access to this information to ensure proper fund utilization, even if it's not made public.

As the possibility of an impeachment trial against the Vice President looms, there is a strong belief that these crucial questions will finally be answered. "I think they deserve, all of us deserve to know the truth behind the utilization of these confidential funds," Adiong asserted, emphasizing the right of every Filipino taxpayer to understand how their money is being spent.

The unfolding events underscore a critical moment for Philippine governance. The public's demand for full disclosure and accountability, particularly concerning the allocation of confidential funds, serves as a powerful reminder that in a democracy, transparency is not merely a preference but a fundamental right. The burden now lies with the relevant authorities and the impending legal proceedings to unveil the truth and ensure that those found to have misused public funds are held responsible.