A LEGAL expert has raised concerns regarding procedural fairness and evidentiary thresholds in the Office of the Ombudsman’s investigation into the national flood control project allegations, saying that the agency’s primary responsibility is to enforce public accountability, and all official proceedings must be firmly based on ‘verifiable, tangible evidence rather than prejudice.’
Legal expert Antonio Bucoy argued that the watchdog agency is pursuing charges without sufficient backing following recent developments, including the retraction of testimonies by multiple key witnesses and former aides involved in the allegations.
Bucoy noted that previous allegations against the Leyte Rep. Martin Romualdez have unraveled following retractions from key witnesses, including former marine Orly Guteza and 25 former aides of former Party-list Rep. Zaldy Co of Ako Bicol.
According to Bucoy, no private contractors, local district engineers, or Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) officials-including former Public Works Secretary Manuel Bonoan-have formally linked the former Speaker to ghost or substandard flood control projects. Bucoy emphasized that while the Ombudsman’s duty is to enforce public accountability, proceedings must be anchored strictly on credible, tangible evidence rather than prejudgment.
He also questioned the basis of the Ombudsman’s claim of having 28 new witnesses, noting that the announcement closely coincided with statements from lawyer Levito Baligod, who represents a group of whistleblowers known as the ‘Maleta Boys.’
Bucoy urged the Ombudsman to ensure independent verification of witness testimony rather than relying on shifting narratives, adding that any case lacking solid legal grounding should be dismissed in accordance with due process.
Bucoy recalled that before Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla decided to conduct a preliminary investigation on the allegations against Romualdez, he already labelled the lawmaker as a mastermind in the flood control scam.