The Office of the Ombudsman’s decision to make former Public Works secretary Manuel Bonoan and other Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) officials state witnesses drew criticism on Wednesday, as a former law school dean argued that those who oversaw the design, bidding, implementation, and payment of allegedly irregular projects should be considered key figures in the alleged plunder scheme and should face prosecution instead of receiving immunity.
Former Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila (PLM) president and College of Law Dean Jose Roy III, who served on the defense team of impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona in 2012, said DPWH officials controlled crucial stages of government projects, including funding, design, bidding, contractor selection, approval of completed works, and payment releases, making their role central to any alleged irregularities.
‘I have long noticed that DPWH officials are repeatedly being given immunity in these cases,’ Roy said, questioning why officials with direct control over projects were being protected from prosecution.
His remarks came after the Sandiganbayan Fifth Division approved the Ombudsman’s request to remove Bonoan as an accused in cases involving an alleged P573-million flood-control kickback scheme, allowing him to serve as a state witness.
Roy argued that under the law, a state witness must not appear to be the most guilty among those accused. He questioned whether lawmakers accused of receiving kickbacks could be considered more responsible than officials who controlled the transactions.
He said DPWH officials handled the documents, approvals, and processes needed for government funds to be released, giving them a major role in determining accountability.
The ruling differed from an earlier decision by another Sandiganbayan division, which kept Bonoan as an accused in a separate graft case.
Roy warned that allowing officials who allegedly played major roles in the transactions to escape prosecution could weaken efforts to hold those responsible accountable.
Meanwhile, the camp of former Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez questioned the Ombudsman’s continued focus on the Leyte congressman, saying there was no credible evidence linking him to the alleged flood-control controversy.
Romualdez’s legal counsel-spokesman Ade Fajardo said the investigation appeared to unfairly single out the former House leader despite other officials being removed from allegations after witnesses withdrew their claims.
Fajardo said five members of the so-called ’18 Maleta Boys,’ including alleged star witness Orly Guteza, formally retracted their accusations against Romualdez through sworn affidavits.
He added that 25 colleagues of the recanting witnesses also disputed the original allegations, further weakening the claims against the former Speaker.
Despite the withdrawals, Fajardo said the Ombudsman continued to pursue a case against Romualdez, which he described as difficult to understand.
‘We are puzzled why the former Speaker is being treated this way. It appears that the matter has become personal,’ Fajardo said.
Estrada remains charged
THE Sandiganbayan’s Fifth Division, voting 2-1, earlier dropped Bonoan as co-accused of Sen. Jose Pimentel Ejercito alias Jinggoy Estrada in the plunder and graft charges filed against them in connection with the flood control scandal.
In a 29-page resolution, the court granted the motion filed by the Ombudsman on June 29, 2026 seeking the amendment of the information to exclude Bonoan as co-accused in the case.
‘Accused Manuel Manligas Bonoan is accordingly excluded from the information in these cases and the warrants of arrest and hold departure order issued by this division against him in these cases are recalled,’ the resolution read.
The anti-graft court held that the decision to move for the discharge of an accused ‘is part of the Ombudsman’s prosecutorial discretion in the determination of who should be used as a state witness to bolster the successful prosecution of criminal offenses.’
The Ombudsman moved for Bonoan’s removal from the plunder and graft case following its decision to accept his offer to become a state witness against high profile individuals, including Romualdez, who are being linked in the flood control mess.
It earlier said that Bonoan has valuable information to offer in connection with the budget process, particularly on the DPWH budget, in which the House leadership allegedly made insertions for kickbacks.
Romualdez has been tagged ‘master plunderer’ by Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla for allegedly manipulating and pocketing funds intended for flood control projects of the government from 2022 to 2025 amounting to at least P56 billion.
The former House leader is now a subject of a preliminary investigation for plunder, graft, bribery and money laundering charges before the Ombudsman.
The Sandiganbayan further held that the Ombudsman has the prerogative to exercise its power to grant immunity to a witness under Republic Act 6770 or the Ombudsman Act of 1989.
The anti-graft court did not give weight to the opposition raised by Bonoan’s co-accused that his exclusion from the information would prejudice their defenses.
‘As correctly argued by the prosecution, the participation of accused Bonoan is not deleted in the information, he is still included in the facilitation of the inclusion of the DPWH projects,’ the anti-graft court pointed out.
In his opposition, Estrada argued that Bonoan’s discharge as state witness would be prejudicial to his rights as the latter can now be expected to take the stand and deflect the blame to him.
The Sandiganbayan, however, ruled that Estrada’s claim ‘is speculative.’
‘The accused are not deprived of their defense as they may still deny any conspiracy or agreement between themselves or as between accused Estrada and Bonoan.
‘They shall also be fully afforded the opportunity to cross-examine accused Bonoan and impeach his testimony during trial,’ it added.
Thus, the Fifth Division finally set the arraignment of Estrada on September 3 (Thursday) for the plunder and graft charge.
Three other co-accused in the case namely DPWH-Manila assistant district engineer Denryl Caesar Cortuna and district engineers Manny Bulusan and Arturo Gonzales, Jr. have previously been arraigned.
However, Bonoan remains as Estrada’s co-accused in the graft case pending before the Second Division.
It may be recalled that last month the Second Division denied the Ombudsman’s motion to amend the information and exclude Bonoan as co-accused.
The Second Division held that Estrada had already been arraigned on June 4, thus, dropping Bonoan as his co-accused would alter the theory of the prosecution from one involving concerted criminal action to one involving a lone criminal action.
The Second Division added that Bonoan’s exclusion will force Estrada to prepare a different defense.
The senator is being detained on plunder and graft charges filed by the Ombudsman for allegedly receiving kickbacks from the government’s flood control projects amounting to over P573 million for the period 2024-2025.
The Ombudsman claimed Estrada along with former Department of Public Works and Highways officials and several individuals were involved in an ‘intricate mechanism involving illegal budgetary insertions and project allocations’ within the DPWH infrastructure portfolio for the year 2025.