‘What Forbes Park house?’ Prove it, Palace says on claimed BBM property

Malacañang on Thursday said it had no information on whether President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. owned a property in Forbes Park, Makati City, amid intensifying questions triggered by testimonies and allegations made during the Senate’s flood control investigation on 19 January.

Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Claire Castro made the statement after questions resurfaced about the mansion at 30 Tamarind Road and another along Narra Avenue in exclusive Forbes Park, after the first home emerged as a focal point in the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee probe into alleged irregularities in flood control projects.

“At this time, we have no information. No information has been given to us about that,” Castro said in Filipino. She noted that it was up to those making the claims to substantiate them.

“Whatever they said, it would be better if they could present evidence to prove it. As for what they mentioned about former House Speaker [Martin] Romualdez, let us allow the former House Speaker to respond to that,” she said.

As this developed, Senate Blue Ribbon Committee chairperson Panfilo Lacson said Romualdez may be invited to the panel’s next hearing, though he cannot be forcefully summoned for questioning in case he turned down the invitation.

Lacson’s statement came in the wake of scathing criticisms by minority Senators Rodante Marcoleta and Imee Marcos, over the committee’s purported lack of effort to excavate the extent of Romualdez’s alleged involvement in the house in South Forbes Park.

Cannot be forced

“We can invite Romualdez anew and course the invitation through Speaker Faustino Dy III. If he wants to attend, he is welcome to come and air his side. But he cannot be forced to come due to interparliamentary courtesy,” Lacson said in Filipino in an interview.

Interparliamentary courtesy is a long-standing tradition in Congress in which members of both chambers — the House of Representatives and the Senate — do not meddle in each other’s affairs.

Lacson said Romualdez was invited in previous hearings to shed light on his alleged role in the scheme, though he did not specify how the congressman refused the invitation.

Romualdez has been tagged as the owner of a property at 30 Tamarind Road, South Forbes Park — the house acquired solely to serve as a drop-off point and storage facility for SOPs or kickbacks from flood control projects, as alleged by former lawmaker and administration ally Elizaldy Co.

The kickbacks were supposedly intended for Romualdez and President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., who also reportedly reside in the posh subdivision, allegedly in the house along Narra Street.

Marcos and Romualdez had denied Co’s allegations.

Two witnesses, who testified under the aliases Joy and Maria, said at Monday’s Blue Ribbon Committee hearing that it was Romualdez who acquired the Tamarind house, citing contractor Curlee Discaya.

‘Cover-up’

The witnesses alleged that they briefly encountered Discaya on 1 February 2024, who introduced himself only as the property’s “contractor,” while assisting them in vacating the house.

The women’s testimonies appeared to support parts of earlier public claims made by Co and former Marine Orly Guteza.

Marcoleta and Senator Marcos, along with four minority senators, had released a so-called “minority report” outlining the “lapses” in the ongoing flood control probe headed by Lacson.

They called it “stagnant” and hinted at a potential cover-up of high-ranking officials, specifically Romualdez.

Lacson, in response, dismissed the minority report, calling it a blatant “disrespect” to the committee and against the Senate rules. He also argued that he is not shielding Romualdez.

Over at the Department of Justice (DoJ), an official said they are treating as a “lead” — not evidence — the latest claims made at the Senate hearing.

DoJ Prosecutor General Richard Fadullon said the women’s testimonies may point investigators in one direction, but were not enough to support the filing of criminal charges.

Different track

“It can be considered as possible evidence and a lead, but we cannot be reliant on two individuals and need to conduct further investigation,” Fadullon said.

He noted that the financial authorities were already acting on a separate track.

He said several individuals linked to the alleged flood control anomalies have had their assets frozen by the Anti-Money Laundering Council  even as criminal complaints were still being firmed up.