The Office of the Ombudsman says its investigation involving former House Speaker and Leyte Rep. Martin Romualdez is far from resting on a handful of controversial witnesses.
The anti-graft agency said it has 28 witnesses prepared to provide direct and material information on transactions under investigation in cases involving Romualdez, a disclosure that comes as questions continue to swirl around the recantation of former Zaldy Co aide Orly Guteza.
The development was reported by Bombo Radyo on Thursday, August 20, citing an official statement from the Ombudsman. The agency said more than 20 of the witnesses are already undergoing the legal process connected with the investigation.
The Ombudsman also said some of the witnesses are uniformed personnel who remain in active government service, potentially broadening the evidentiary picture beyond the individuals whose testimonies have recently become the subject of dispute.
The Guteza recantation changed the headlines—but not the investigation
The Ombudsman’s latest disclosure followed reports that Orly Guteza, a former soldier who had previously alleged that money was delivered to Romualdez’s residence, withdrew his earlier account.
The agency has characterized witness recantations in high-profile investigations as a potential pressure tactic and stressed that its case does not depend on only one or a few witnesses.
That position is significant because four former bodyguards of former Ako Bicol Rep. Zaldy Co have also been at the center of the controversy after they reportedly recanted earlier statements linking Romualdez to alleged cash deliveries.
Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla previously alleged that Romualdez’s camp was behind the recantations, saying the former speaker’s camp would benefit from the witnesses withdrawing their statements. Romualdez has denied the allegation, accusing Remulla of prejudice.
The Ombudsman has also indicated that the four former bodyguards could face inclusion as respondents in the preliminary investigation if they no longer cooperate as witnesses.
Romualdez has mounted his own defense
The latest development comes as Romualdez’s legal team continues to challenge the allegations.
Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano confirmed that Romualdez submitted his counter-affidavit on August 7, 2026. His camp has also indicated that it would submit a supplemental counter-affidavit containing sworn statements from 25 former drivers and security aides of Zaldy Co, including the recantation involving Guteza.
The defense has maintained that the witnesses being relied upon by the Ombudsman should be scrutinized and that Romualdez should be afforded due process.
Romualdez has previously questioned the use of witnesses he described as unreliable or discredited.
The cases involve more than the witness controversy
The witness dispute is only one part of a much larger investigation.
The Ombudsman previously ordered Romualdez and his co-respondents to answer recommendations from its special investigators involving allegations of plunder, graft, bribery and money laundering connected to suspected irregularities in flood control projects.
The respondents were given 15 days from receipt of the order to submit their counter-affidavits.
The investigation has been closely tied to the broader government probe into alleged corruption surrounding billions of pesos worth of flood control projects.
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has said the matter is now in the hands of the Ombudsman and that he is not privy to the details or timetable of the investigation. Marcos said he would leave the case to Ombudsman Remulla, while indicating that he may seek an update from the anti-graft agency.
Why the 28 witnesses matter
The number itself does not establish guilt.
What it does show is that the Ombudsman says its investigation has multiple potential sources of evidence, even after several witnesses became embroiled in a credibility dispute.
That distinction is crucial.
The 28 individuals have not, simply by being identified as witnesses, established that Romualdez committed any crime. Their statements and other evidence still have to be evaluated through the legal process, while Romualdez retains the right to challenge the allegations and present his defense.
The Ombudsman itself has previously emphasized that questions regarding the ultimate credibility of witnesses and the guilt of respondents are matters that can ultimately be determined by the proper courts if formal cases are filed.
A case that keeps getting bigger
The Romualdez investigation has continued to expand despite attempts by the defense to challenge the evidence.
Earlier in July, the Ombudsman described itself as being close to completing its fact-finding investigation into Romualdez over the flood control controversy.
By July 28, the agency had already directed Romualdez and other respondents to answer recommendations involving multiple criminal allegations.
Then came the witness recantations.
Now, the Ombudsman says it has 28 other witnesses prepared to provide information relevant to the transactions under investigation.
That leaves the biggest question hanging over the case:
Will those 28 witnesses provide the evidence that allows investigators to move forward despite the growing battle over witness credibility?
For now, the answer remains with the Ombudsman and, ultimately, the courts if charges are formally filed and prosecuted.
Romualdez remains entitled to the presumption of innocence, while the allegations against him remain allegations unless established through the appropriate legal proceedings.
Leave a Reply