The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) has dismissed allegations made by 18 former bodyguards who claimed they delivered suitcases of cash to government officials, saying the accusations lacked credible evidence and appeared to be part of a coordinated effort rather than independent whistleblowing.

Speaking before the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee's inquiry into alleged anomalies in flood control projects, NBI Director Melvin Matibag said investigators found no sufficient basis to pursue charges against the personalities named by the former security aides.

“The story was not supported by adequate evidence and corroboration,” Matibag told lawmakers, citing the absence of credible witnesses, compromised photographic evidence, and reliance on a collective affidavit that failed to establish personal knowledge of the alleged transactions.

According to Matibag, the political backdrop of the accusations suggested a “coordinated operation” rather than spontaneous disclosures from independent witnesses.

“What does this mean? Because they were being coached, their statements depended on political perceptions or political beliefs,” he said in Filipino.

“For example, in the first affidavit, two senators were mentioned. But when the senators' alliances changed, the affidavit also changed and additional personalities were included.”

Matibag noted that the former bodyguards initially identified Senators Loren Legarda and Mark Villar as alleged recipients of cash deliveries, but their names were no longer mentioned when the witnesses later appeared before the Senate.

He also challenged the group's central claim that the suitcases contained cash, saying it was largely based on hearsay rather than direct observation.

The NBI chief questioned the decision to execute a joint affidavit instead of individual sworn statements.

“There were members who did not know the entire story, but their statements were included in the collective narrative prepared by their counsel,” he said.

“A collective execution does not convert hearsay into personal knowledge.”

Matibag further disclosed evidence suggesting the witnesses coordinated their testimonies before going public.

“The affidavit was the product of collective briefings, common housing, and content assembled by counsel. The affiants were housed in a unit controlled by counsel where there was real-time coaching and interviews,” he said.

According to investigators, the former bodyguards had been staying together since November, months before holding a press conference in February.

“What this means is that they built a narrative,” Matibag said.

The NBI director also revealed that lawyer Levi Baligod allegedly approached former bodyguard Johnny Buduan, who later helped recruit others into the group.

Matibag added that one witness admitted receiving allowances from Baligod, a practice that, according to him, may raise ethical concerns under the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability.

Citing Supreme Court jurisprudence, Matibag said coordinated testimony carries limited evidentiary value, particularly when affidavits contain nearly identical language.

“When multiple witnesses function like synchronized recorders, the testimony fails the test of personal knowledge and perception required under the Rules of Court because the court cannot determine where the real observation ends and the script begins,” he said, quoting a Supreme Court ruling.

In a text message to DAILY TRIBUNE, Baligod rejected Matibag's assertions.

“Matibag is a political operator more than an investigator. NBI should instead investigate him,” Baligod said.