Rep. Martin Romualdez. INQUIRER PHOTO / NIÑO JESUS ORBETA
MANILA, Philippines — Former Speaker Martin Romualdez’s lawyers on Thursday filed a supplemental affidavit seeking the dismissal of the plunder complaint filed against him by the Office of the Ombudsman over the flood control scandal.
Romualdez’s lawyer Felix Villa, who submitted the document to the antigraft body, said it included a statement from Orly Guteza, an ex-Marine and a former security aide to ex-Ako Bicol Rep. Zaldy Co, recanting his testimony in the Senate that he delivered suitcases containing millions in cash to Romualdez’s residence.
Abe Fajardo, the Leyte representative’s spokesperson and one of his lawyers, said that varying statements of witnesses and the lack of forensic or documentary evidence showed that there was no hard evidence against the former Speaker.
The supplemental affidavit also includes sworn statements by 25 former drivers and security aides of Co to dispute allegations that suitcases containing millions in cash were delivered to Romualdez by 18 so-called “Maleta Boys,” also former aides of the ex-congressman, Fajardo said.
Lawyer Levito Baligod, who served as counsel for the 18 men, submitted a single joint affidavit to the Office of the Ombudsman, claiming that they delivered suitcases containing billions of pesos in alleged kickbacks from corruption-tainted flood control projects to President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., Romualdez and other officials from 2022 to 2025.
The president and the former speaker have strongly denied the allegations.
Ombudsman’s response
In a statement on Thursday, the Office of the Ombudsman downplayed Guteza’s recantation.
“Recantations in high-profile cases are nothing new,” it said. “This is a classic pressure tactic.”
The Ombudsman, who included statements from eight of the 18 “Maleta Boys” as part of the evidence against Romualdez, said the investigation would not depend on a single or even a handful of witnesses.
“The Office of the Ombudsman is informing [the public] that it has 28 witnesses ready to provide direct and material knowledge regarding the transactions being investigated in the case involving former Speaker Martin Romualdez,” it said.
The 28 witnesses are active uniformed personnel who are now undergoing legal processes, it added.
It pointed out that cooperation in an official investigation was not a choice but an obligation under the law.
“Anyone who dares to obstruct, interfere with, or disrupt the Ombudsman’s proceedings will face the full force of the law,” it warned. “The search for the truth will not stop, even if some people are still unwilling to speak.”
Alleged kickbacks
On July 20, Ombudsman investigators filed a supplemental complaint-affidavit for plunder, direct bribery, graft and corruption, and money laundering against Romualdez, Co, and several other people in connection with alleged kickbacks from anomalous flood control projects from 2022 to 2025.
“It’s a noncase,” Fajardo told reporters. “It should be dismissed because there is no evidence except for the stories, and yet those stories are varying.”
He said the complaint against Romualdez seemed to rely “only on oral evidence or oral testimony, which we all know is very unreliable.”
“That’s why we have laws on perjury, libel, et cetera, because these things are easily manufactured,” he said.
Fajardo noted that the National Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice separately found that the statements of “these individuals” were libelous enough for cyberlibel and perjury cases to be filed against them.
Guteza was the latest former aide to Co who had recanted. Last month, four of the eight former Co aides withdrew their allegations against the former Speaker. Baligod later said they allegedly received P10 million each to recant but did not specify the source of the money.
In an affidavit dated Aug. 13 obtained by the Inquirer on Wednesday, Guteza said that he had no personal knowledge of the alleged delivery of suitcases containing cash to Co’s Pasig residence and to Romualdez’s home in Taguig City.
Marcoleta, Defensor roles
Guteza claimed that it was Sen. Rodante Marcoleta and former Anakalusugan Rep. Mike Defensor who allegedly fabricated the story in exchange for P150 million and scholarships for his children.
“Out of fear and anxiety, everything stated in the affidavit they prepared was something I claimed to have witnessed, even though it was not true; this included the statement that I took part in three deliveries of suitcases to the alleged residence of Speaker Martin Romualdez. I never had any direct contact with Speaker Romualdez, nor did I even see him at that address,” Guteza said.
Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano said investigators may also include the four “Maleta Boys” who recanted their statements in the plunder complaint against Romualdez.
Neither Marcoleta nor Defensor, who are being detained without bail in a separate plunder case, has released a statement regarding Guteza’s recantation, which was first made public in his interview with GMA 7 on Wednesday night.
Sen. Erwin Tulfo, the new chair of the Senate blue ribbon committee which heard Guteza’s testimony last year, said that it would be up to the Office of the Ombudsman to determine whether the former Marine should face charges after recanting his statement.
“Anything that has to do with the blue ribbon’s flood control investigation, we have forwarded to the [Ombudsman] already,” Tulfo said.
Tulfo, however, welcomed Guteza’s retraction of his statement, which, he said, was not only false but also damaging to those who were implicated in his testimony.
Lacson: Not surprising
For Sen. Panfilo “Ping” Lacson, Guteza’s recantation of the alleged cash deliveries to Romualdez was not surprising, saying that “he was identified as a ‘coached’ witness” during last year’s blue ribbon panel hearing.
“Since it is on record that Marcoleta coached Guteza, it is not surprising that Guteza would backtrack on his claims someday,” Lacson said.
Lacson cited Senate CCTV records showing Guteza going to Marcoleta’s office and spending half an hour there, before appearing at the blue ribbon hearing.
He said the case of Guteza and the other “Maleta Boys” smacks of attempts to personally gain from their alleged involvement in the flood control mess.
Malacañang on Thursday called on law enforcement agencies to pursue charges against those behind the alleged fabricated testimonies of supposed witnesses in the government’s investigation of the flood control scandal.
“Whoever masterminded the creation of these kinds of scenarios should be charged,” Palace press officer Claire Castro said in a press briefing.
She said it was now in the hands of the Office of the Ombudsman, the Department of Justice and other investigating bodies to ferret out the truth.
“What the president wants is for the story to be true. So, what Mr. Guteza said must also be investigated. His claims after his recantation must be verified to determine whether they are truthful,” Castro added.
Part of ‘destabilization’
According to Malacañang, the fabrication of stories by Guteza and other ex-bodyguards could be part of the “destabilization” attempt to unseat the president.
“This is concerning because it could undermine our justice system. It could also undermine the public’s trust because more false information, fake news, and misinformation could be spread and affect the truth,” Castro said.
In his State of the Nation Address (Sona) last month, Mr. Marcos noted that the flood control scandal, which he himself brought out publicly in his Sona last year, was nearing the prosecution of the former Speaker, his first cousin, and that it pained him.
“We have reached a point when, according to the Ombudsman, the filing of multiple cases against the former House speaker will be done soon. This is painful for us, but we have to do what is right. I am not the president of my family. I am not the president of my friend,” Marcos said.
“I am the president of the Philippines, and my duty is to you—my fellow Filipinos,” he added.
In response, Romualdez said he respected the President’s statement but that he was determined to prove his innocence. —WITH REPORTS FROM ISABELLE PECHAY, TINA G. SANTOS, DEXTER CABALZA AND INQUIRER RESEARCH