Former House Speaker and Leyte Representative Martin Romualdez. Photo courtesy of PNA.
Leyte Rep. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez pressed the Office of the Ombudsman to consider the recantations of witnesses who had linked him to alleged cash deliveries, arguing that their reversals came before trial and could affect whether the complaints against him should proceed.
Romualdez made the argument in a supplemental counter-affidavit filed as the Ombudsman investigated him over alleged plunder, graft, bribery and money laundering tied to the flood control controversy.
His filing included the recantation of former security aide Orly Guteza and sworn statements from 25 former drivers and security personnel of former Ako Bicol Rep. Zaldy Co.
Citing Balderama v. People, Romualdez argued that Supreme Court skepticism toward recantations generally involved testimony withdrawn during trial or after conviction.
He maintained that sworn reversals made during preliminary investigation should instead be weighed in determining whether there was sufficient basis to bring a case to court.
“The very stage where such sworn recantations and denials carry the most, not the least, evidentiary weight, since they go directly to whether the case should proceed to trial in the first place,” Romualdez said.
Guteza had earlier alleged that he helped deliver suitcases containing cash to Romualdez in connection with purported kickbacks from flood control projects.
In an Aug. 13 affidavit, however, Guteza withdrew that account and claimed Sen. Rodante Marcoleta and former lawmaker Mike Defensor had pressured him to implicate Romualdez.
Malacañang later said authorities should determine which of Guteza’s conflicting accounts was truthful and investigate any possible manipulation.
Romualdez said investigators should not simply disregard such reversals but compare the witnesses’ original statements with their subsequent affidavits, examine how each account was obtained and determine the reasons behind the changes.
His camp also cited statements from 25 former Co aides who denied knowledge or participation in the alleged deliveries.
Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla has publicly pushed back against the recantations.
Earlier this month, he alleged that Romualdez’s camp was behind the decision of several of the so-called “maleta boys” to reverse their statements and maintained that the investigation did not depend solely on a handful of witnesses.
Romualdez’s camp has disputed the allegations against him.
Romualdez nevertheless maintained that the conflicting sworn accounts should be resolved during the preliminary investigation, where the Ombudsman determines whether the evidence warrants prosecution.
His lawyers have asked the anti-graft body to dismiss the complaints, arguing that the recantations and denials weakened the factual basis of allegations linking him to the supposed cash deliveries.