The battle for the public sentiment has shifted to the affidavit of whistleblower Orly Guteza, the former Marine who worked as an aide to Ako Bicol Representative Zaldy Co.
Senator Rodante Marcoleta on Friday challenged the lawyer who disowned the notarization of Guteza’s affidavit to present her notarial register, saying it would determine who was telling the truth amid the widening flood control corruption scandal.
“Summon the lawyer and let her bring her notarial register. We will see who is really telling the truth,” Marcoleta said.
Lawyer Petchie Rose G. Espera, whose name was on Guteza’s affidavit, denied notarizing the document, saying the signature and notarial details attributed to her were “falsified and unauthorized.”
Marcoleta disputed this, pointing out that the notarial register is the ultimate proof.
“It may be true that she was not the one who signed it. But why allow your staff or secretary to sign for you? How could Guteza have gotten your notarial register?” he asked.
“The ultimate arbiter is the notarial register. If we find that the number on Guteza’s document matches the one in her register, then you will be disbarred. This can backfire. You said you didn’t sign it, but you allowed someone else you trusted to sign,” Marcoleta said.
Espera’s denial has cast serious doubt on Guteza’s credibility. The whistleblower, introduced by Marcoleta as a surprise witness at the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing last Thursday, accused Co and former speaker Martin Romualdez of receiving P1.68 billion in cash delivered in suitcases.
Guteza claimed that 46 suitcases, each containing P48 million, were delivered to Co, with most of the bags later brought to Romualdez’s home in Forbes Park, Makati City. He testified that the deliveries took place multiple times while he was working as a security consultant to Co between December 2024 and August 2025.
Residence under renovation
Romualdez has denied the allegations, pointing out his residence had been undergoing renovation since January 2024. Co has likewise rejected the claims.
Following Espera’s denial, Blue Ribbon Committee chairperson Senator Panfilo Lacson ordered a full record check and background investigation on Guteza, saying the panel had not been informed beforehand of his appearance.
The flood control corruption inquiry has implicated several lawmakers, including Senators Joel Villanueva, Jinggoy Estrada and Chiz Escudero, along with former senators Nancy Binay and Bong Revilla. So-called “super contractors” Curlee and Sarah Discaya were also named, along with more than 17 House members who allegedly received commissions from flood control projects.
All those named have denied receiving kickbacks from public works allocations.
Former representative Mike Defensor believes Guteza has no motive for fabricating his affidavit despite questions surrounding its notarization.
Defensor said the core of Guteza’s claims remained consistent. He said that Guteza’s statements under oath before the senators was already admissible in court.
“It’s immaterial to me since he made a sworn statement in the Senate. He made a statement under oath, which carries the weight of evidence in a legal proceeding. Whether there was a mistake with the notary, he signed it,” he said.
“He presented to the Senate, and then he verbalized what he said. That’s enough. That’s evidence,” Defensor added.
In a statement, Espera said, “I categorically deny notarizing, signing, or participating in the preparation of the said document. The signature and notarial details attributed to me are falsified and unauthorized.”
Defensor, however, stood by Guteza.
“No red flags. And you know what he told me, even if they check, you know, it’s easy to check if he’s a security detail of a political party-list, if he’s part of this, you will see it,” he said.
It was Defensor who introduced Guteza to Senator Rodante Marcoleta before he was presented at the Senate’s hearing last Thursday.
More to come forward
Defensor said Guteza had approached him with a typewritten affidavit outlining alleged cash deliveries to several public officials.
According to Defensor, Guteza has declined formal witness protection, choosing instead to remain under the protection of his fellow Marines.
Defensor said that other individuals may also come forward.
“Sergeant Guteza was in front of me, you know, while he was discussing [the statement]… someone would call him and then they would say — ‘I’m coming out, just support me. We are Marines,’” he said.
Guteza testified that he was part of a 90-man security and operations group tasked with delivering kickback money, which he referred to as “basura,” to various locations, including the residences of Co and Romualdez.
In his testimony, Guteza said the deliveries occurred up to three times a week, starting in December 2024.
Manila RTC key to truth
For Lacson, the Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) may be the key to uncovering the truth behind the controversial affidavit.
In a statement Saturday, Lacson said the Manila RTC, particularly its executive judge, has jurisdiction to investigate any irregularities involving notarized documents.
He said it could shed light on the circumstances surrounding the affidavit read by Guteza, whose sudden appearance raised eyebrows inside and outside the Senate.
“The Manila RTC can help unravel the mystery behind the now (in)famous Guteza affidavit since part of the executive judge’s function is to investigate violations relating to notarized documents within its jurisdiction,” he pointed out.
“Was he just made to sign a prepared affidavit that he read during the committee hearing, and by whom?” he asked.