Misplaced zeal: Media reports highlight potential “impeachment” ahead of the discussion

WITH BUDGET talks underway, media are doing the right thing calling attention to the exchange on allocations and other issues related to the budget. Indeed, members of the minority in Congress were correct in recalling records showing the disbursement of the Office of the Vice President’s (OVP) confidential funds in 2022. However, media’s focus on a premature note about impeachment may have distracted from the paramount importance of the issue raised in the first place. 

What’s the Story

Probe, not quite “impeachment” 

On August 25, House Deputy Minority Leader France Castro said in an online press conference livestreamed on Facebook at 11 AM that VP Sara Duterte should explain the source of the OVP’s PHP 125 million worth of confidential funds for 2022, given that such an item was not provided for under the 2022 General Appropriations Act (GAA). 

She noted that the 2022 GAA was prepared and proposed by then President Rodrigo Duterte and enacted by Congress in 2021. Castro said former VP Leni Robredo, who finished her term in June 2022, did not ask for and consequently was not given any confidential funds for her office. However, citing the 2022 annual audit report of the Commission on Audit (COA) for the OVP, particularly on page 38 of the Notes to Financial Statement, Castro underscored that “there was an additional allotment for Confidential Expense during the second semester amounting to PHP 125 million.”

A reporter asked if Castro would file an impeachment complaint against Duterte. The lawmaker answered: “Tungkol sa impeachment, siyempre pag-aaralan natin ‘yung mga possibility para mapanagot kung makikita natin talaga itong mga binanggit nating violation na ito, lalong lalo na ‘to misuse of public funds, technical malversation, at saka paglabag sa Constitution.” (About impeachment, we would study the possibilities on how to hold officials accountable should it be proven that there were violations, especially the misuse of public funds, technical malversation, and violating the Constitution.) 

She added that she is still waiting for the findings of the COA’s investigation into the matter. “Darating din tayo diyan sa impeachment pag buo na ‘yong ating data, information, facts, at documents.” (We will come to the discussion of impeachment once our data, information, facts, and documents are complete.)

On the same day at 3PM, Duterte issued a statement on Facebook, saying that Castro has “wildly and masterfully arranged some allegations against me and the OVP, which will all be answered once the probe is done and during the budget hearing.” 

On August 25, all online media or counterparts the Daily Tribune, ABS-CBN News, Manila Bulletin, Inquirer.net, and CNN Philippines reported on the issue, citing both statements of Castro and Duterte. This except for Bulletin which only recorded Duterte’s statement. In its report, Inquirer.net used the word “oust” to describe Castro’s “threat.” 

In broadcast channels, ANC’s Top Story on August 25 and GMA’s 24 Oras Weekend on August 26 aired respective reports. The Inquirer print edition reported on August 26. All reports above, except for GMA and Tribune carried the “impeachment” in their headlines. 

“Premature”

On August 26, Castro clarified in a statement that it’s still too early or “premature” to discuss an impeachment complaint, maintaining her position that the OVP’s use of confidential funds in 2022 was “illegal.” She said that they are preparing not for an impeachment, but awaiting the COA report. ABS-CBN News, CNN Philippines, ANC’s Dateline Philippines, Teleradyo Serbisyo, The Philippine Star, Inquirer, One News PH, Manila Times, Manila Standard, and Daily Tribune reported the clarification. 

On August 28, Castro said that the Department of Budget and Management released in December 2022 a Special Allotment Release Order which includes the PHP 125 million for confidential funds. Castro also cited the OVP’s Statement of Appropriations, Allotments, Obligations, Disbursements and Balances which she said showed that the PHP 125 million in Confidential Funds was spent from December 13 to 31, 2022, pointing to a total period of 19 days. She asked the OVP to “personally clarify the sensitive issue” in the budget hearing.

CNN Philippines and Manila Standard reported Castro’s statement and documents cited, adding Duterte’s earlier statement or at least a sentence that they are seeking comment from the Vice President on the  alleged 19-day spending. 

Inquirer, in its article, only reported on the issue based on Castro’s statement, and did not include a response from the OVP. Meanwhile, in another one-sided account, Manila Bulletin cited the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC) “backing” up Duterte, the task force insistent that Castro’s party list group was only “sowing” intrigue and hate. While it identified Castro as raising the question, all quotes, the headline, lead, and most of the article merely repeated the NTF-ELCAC.

Swift Budget Briefing

Teleradyo Serbisyo and Manila Bulletin published later reports on the 19-day record expense of confidential funds after the budget hearing on August 30. Bulletin reported Duterte’s August 30 statement, saying that there was “nothing irregular or unauthorized” in the OVP’s use of confidential funds in 2022. 

All media reported on the swiftness of the budget hearing and how Castro was not able to ask Duterte questions on the OVP budget. The House Committee on Appropriations terminated the deliberation of the OVP’s proposed budget for 2024 in just 14 minutes. Senior Deputy Majority Leader Sandro Marcos moved to terminate discussions citing “parliamentary courtesy” and “longstanding tradition.” 

Members of the Makabayan bloc objected to the motion. But Castro was not allowed to continue her manifestation and her microphone was muted. 

Media captured what happened in their headlines and videos using the words  “ramming,” “breezing,” or “railroading” of the OVP’s proposed budget. Given the clear disregard for the views of the minority bloc shown by the media, vigorous reactions from netizens swept through social media. They questioned the practice of suppressing minority views in Congress, as these pertained to how public funds were being spent. “Bastusan sa batasan,” (Rudeness in the Congress) “peak corruption,” and “what about giving courtesy to taxpayers?” were among them. 

What The Reports Got Right

News accounts about Castro’s discovery serve as a quick check on a previous use of funds. The recorded speed of expense requires not just the courtesy of a response but a detailed review of how this happened. The House of Representatives budget process is the appropriate venue to take this up. While Duterte may not be legally bound to disclose the expenditure because of the nature of confidential funds, how the special appropriation was done needs Congressional review. Its release must be explained if the allocation was not contained in the annual budget for the period. 

Media was correct to highlight what Castro had to say and what she clarified. But reports should also have included that Castro herself had not discussed “impeachment” as a present option – carefully saying that the achievement of accountability would involve all means. Only CNN Philippines was accurate in pointing out that Castro’s statement was a response to a reporter’s leading question. 

Meanwhile, following the limited time given to the Makabayan bloc in the budget hearing, anchor Alvin Elchico in Teleradyo Serbisyo interviewed Kabataan Partylist Rep. Raoul Manuel, asking what the incident revealed about the House of Representatives. Doris Bigornia asked whether the Congress can still be trusted with the kind of budget briefing that happened. Elchico said that the public has the right to scrutinize the budget as it is the use of their money that needs to be discussed.

Philstar.com was on point to correctly review the budget of former VP Leni Robredo, saying she only received PHP 700 million in her last year of office, compared to Duterte’s PHP 2 billion in 2023.

Why Is This Important?

Reporting on various platforms and its varying time frames, media must take greater care to present the developments, highlighting the background already provided in other reports, and ensuring that all news on their different platforms present a coherent story. 

Just as important, reporters must not get ahead of the story. Hyping the issue of impeachment at this time cast the completely correct examination of the 2022 budget allocation as mere politics on the part of the minority in Congress. The issue Castro raised was important enough on its own; advancing the idea of impeachment resorted to sensationalism, to draw attention but failing in contextual accuracy. Reporting just on one side does not help the efforts to probe wrongdoing and other offenses.

As Congress continues its discussion, it is crucial for the media to track hearings so as to check whether the House of Representatives is exercising its duty of oversight. Congress is a separate branch and power, and it should not merely serve as the executive’s rubber stamp. The ruling alliance can only govern well if these separate powers do their constitutional duty.

To do this, reporters need to understand the budget process and how in implementation, public officials can gain illegal access to public funds. Hard work, but this is the job that journalists must be ready to do.