MANILA, Philippines — Former House Speaker and Leyte 1st District Rep. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez has intensified his defense against allegations linking him to alleged cash deliveries from anomalous flood-control projects, submitting a supplemental counter-affidavit supported by sworn statements from 25 former drivers, security personnel and aides associated with former Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Elizaldy “Zaldy” Co.
The new filings dispute claims previously made by members of the group of former Co security personnel who alleged that suitcases containing large amounts of money were delivered to Romualdez and other officials.
Romualdez’s legal team submitted the supplemental counter-affidavit to the Office of the Ombudsman on August 20, according to multiple reports. His lawyers are asking the anti-graft body to dismiss the complaints against him, arguing that the allegations are weakened by conflicting witness accounts and the absence, according to the defense, of direct documentary or forensic evidence tying Romualdez to the alleged cash deliveries.
25 former Co aides dispute alleged deliveries
Lawyer Ade Fajardo, Romualdez’s counsel and spokesperson, said the 25 individuals whose affidavits were submitted had denied participating in alleged cash deliveries to Romualdez or other government officials.
The defense also claimed that some of the former Co aides were allegedly encouraged to join the group of 18 former security personnel who had accused Romualdez and others of receiving cash-filled suitcases.
According to the defense, some of the 25 individuals allegedly said they were offered financial incentives to join the group. Fajardo did not publicly identify the individuals allegedly behind those offers, saying the details were contained in the supplemental counter-affidavit.
These claims, however, remain allegations by Romualdez’s camp and have not been established as fact by the Ombudsman.
Guteza recants earlier cash-delivery account
The supplemental filing also included the reported recantation of Orly Guteza, a former security aide associated with Co.
Guteza had previously alleged that he personally participated in deliveries of suitcases containing cash to residences associated with Romualdez. His earlier allegations became a major part of the controversy surrounding the alleged cash deliveries.
In a later affidavit, however, Guteza reportedly said he had no personal knowledge of the alleged deliveries and claimed that portions of his previous account were not true. He also accused Senator Rodante Marcoleta and former Anakalusugan party-list Rep. Mike Defensor of inducing him to make accusations in exchange for financial benefits and scholarships for his children. Marcoleta and Defensor have disputed such allegations.
The development is significant because Guteza was among the witnesses whose earlier statements were cited in allegations concerning supposed cash deliveries to Romualdez.
But Ombudsman says probe is far from over
Despite the recantation and Romualdez’s new affidavits, the Office of the Ombudsman has indicated that the investigation does not rest on Guteza alone.
The Ombudsman said 28 other individuals remain available to provide information that investigators consider material to the allegations involving Romualdez. The agency has emphasized that the investigation continues despite the withdrawal of some witness claims.
That means Guteza’s recantation and the 25 new affidavits may strengthen Romualdez’s defense, but they do not automatically end the investigation or clear him of the allegations.
The allegations date back to the 2025 flood-control controversy
The controversy gained national attention after former members of Co’s security team alleged that they transported suitcases allegedly containing cash to several political figures and government officials.
In September 2025, Guteza told a Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing that he had allegedly delivered suitcases of money to residences associated with Romualdez and Co. Other former security personnel later made similar allegations, prompting the Ombudsman to pursue the matter as part of its broader investigation into alleged corruption surrounding flood-control projects.
In February 2026, the Ombudsman also received notarized affidavits from 18 former Marines who claimed they had transported cash-filled luggage as part of operations allegedly connected to Co.
The Ombudsman subsequently sought individual affidavits from the former security personnel so investigators could determine what each witness personally knew rather than rely on a collective account.
Earlier affidavit controversy adds another layer
Guteza’s testimony has faced controversy even before his latest recantation.
In October 2025, the Manila Regional Trial Court ruled that the signature and notarial details of lawyer Petchie Rose Espera appearing on an affidavit attributed to Guteza had been falsified. The court cleared Espera of liability and ordered the Department of Justice to pursue falsification charges against those responsible for the document and its use.
The development is separate from the broader question of whether the alleged cash deliveries actually occurred, but it has become part of the controversy surrounding the credibility and handling of evidence in the case.
Romualdez wants the complaints dismissed
Romualdez’s latest filing represents a more aggressive push to have the complaints against him dismissed.
His lawyers argue that the recantation of Guteza, the affidavits of the 25 former Co aides and what they describe as inconsistencies among witnesses undermine the allegations against the former House speaker.
But the Ombudsman maintains that the investigation must consider the totality of the evidence, including other witnesses and evidence gathered during the probe.
The case therefore remains unresolved.
For now, the battle has shifted from the original cash-delivery accusations to a larger question of which witnesses and evidence the Ombudsman will ultimately consider credible.
And with 28 other witnesses reportedly still in the picture, the latest 25 affidavits may be a major boost for Romualdez’s defense — but they may not be the final word in the flood-control corruption investigation.
Leave a Reply