A House lawmaker raised the possibility Thursday that Vice President Sara Duterte may have violated election law, citing testimony from her alleged bagman that millions of pesos flowed into her 2022 campaign from Chinese nationals tied to Pharmally.
Manila Rep. Joel Chua, who sits on the House committee on justice hearing the impeachment case, said Section 81 of the Omnibus Election Code expressly bars foreign nationals from contributing to any candidate’s campaign expenditures.
“What I see is possible election offense because there is a contribution that transpired. We need to know who are the Chinese citizens involved. If they are foreign nationals and not Filipinos, it is a clear violation of the election code,” Chua said.
Chua, who also chairs the House committee on good government and public accountability, framed the potential offense as a constitutional matter. “If it is proven that foreigners donated to her campaign, it is a clear issue of culpable violation of the Constitution,” he said.
The allegation stems from a supplemental affidavit filed by Ramil Madriaga, identified as Duterte’s bagman, who claimed he received funds from Pharmally financial officer Lin Weixiong and from businessmen Maestrado Lim — also known as Tony Yang — and his brother Michael Yang. Madriaga said the money was channeled through the Initiative for Social Justice, Innovation, and Progress Pilipinas (ISIP), a non-profit he established whose acronym, he admitted, originally stood for “Inday Sara is my President.”
Chua noted that both Lim and Yang were known associates of former president Rodrigo Duterte, with Michael Yang having served as his economic adviser, and that both men have been linked to illegal Philippine offshore gaming operator (POGO) activities.
The impeachment case, however, has been advancing on a separate track. Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Terry Ridon, who chairs the House public accounts committee, said the justice panel has already cleared the threshold needed to recommend impeachment — primarily on the strength of the Commission on Audit’s findings.
“I think we have already achieved the probable cause, and this is based on the confidential funds misuse,” Ridon said, citing COA’s final order requiring Duterte to return P73 million in disallowed funds released to the Office of the Vice President.
Former COA commissioner Heidi Mendoza, speaking on One News Thursday, said the irregularity in the OVP’s use of confidential funds is not in dispute. She acknowledged that Duterte could still bring an appeal before the Supreme Court but drew a clear boundary around what that process could address.
“What will be discussed in the Supreme Court, if there will be an appeal, is whether there is what we call abuse of discretion,” Mendoza said, adding that questions of expenditure validity fall solely within COA’s jurisdiction.
The Vice President’s continued absence from the proceedings has drawn sharp criticism. Duterte skipped the clarificatory hearing on April 14 and has signaled she will not appear at the next scheduled session on April 22. Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante, chairman of the House committee on human rights, called on her to face the committee directly rather than communicate through the press.
“She can give her explanations to the House committee on justice. She should not be engaging in pure propaganda,” Abante said.
Separately, the Office of the Ombudsman has directed Assistant Special Prosecutor Ryan Quilala to submit an explanation after his name surfaced during Madriaga’s testimony at Tuesday’s hearing.
