Romualdez camp argues ‘no proof evident’ in plunder case

The camp of former House Speaker Martin Romualdez maintained that prosecutors lacked strong evidence to prove that he conspired with former Rep. Zaldy Co to amass ill-gotten wealth from infrastructure projects.

Romualdez raised the argument in a petition for bail filed before the Sandiganbayan Third Division on Monday, according to division clerk of court Dennis Pulma.

“Former Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez, thru counsel, filed his petition for bail today, September 28, 2026, at 12:15 p.m.,” Pulma told reporters.

The Third Division is handling Romualdez’s plunder case involving an alleged P7.4 billion in kickbacks from infrastructure projects accumulated from 2022 to 2025, when he served as House speaker.

Prosecutors alleged that Romualdez conspired with Co, then chair of the House Committee on Appropriations, and played a direct role in billions of pesos worth of insertions in the national budget.

Romualdez’s lawyers, however, argued that there was no evidence establishing a direct link between him and the alleged deliveries of cash-filled suitcases carried out by Co’s security personnel.

“The acts of accused Co, the DPWH officials, the contractors, and the security personnel who transported or received the maletas may therefore be weighed for what they show about those persons,” the petition read.

“The evidence that accused Romualdez knowingly committed or joined a combination or series of overt or criminal acts under Section 1(d)(2) or Section 1(d)(6) is not strong,” it added.

The defense also argued that testimonies from former Public Works officials Roberto Bernardo and Henry Alcantara, as well as Co’s alleged security personnel, did not establish that Romualdez was the recipient of the cash.

Romualdez’s lawyers said the subsequent recantations by the security personnel of their statements implicating Romualdez and other public officials further weakened the prosecution’s evidence.

The defense acknowledged that a recantation does not automatically invalidate an earlier testimony or affidavit but argued that prosecutors must establish why the original statements should be given greater weight.

“The Prosecution must be made to show why the original versions should be preferred. Weighed with the recantations and contradictions, the delivery evidence…does not strongly establish the contents, the amount, the unlawful source, or accused Romualdez’s knowing receipt, acquisition, or control for any entry,” the lawyers said.

With the petition filed, the Third Division is set to hold the first bail hearing on 12 October.

Prosecutors said they intend to present 23 witnesses during the bail proceedings, while the defense said it may call three to four witnesses.

Plunder is generally a non-bailable offense when the evidence of guilt is strong. An accused may nevertheless seek bail and ask the court to determine whether the prosecution’s evidence meets that threshold.

In July, former Sen. Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr. was granted provisional liberty in a separate malversation case through a 2-1 decision by the Third Division.

Revilla posted P1 million bail in the case, which was also linked to alleged irregularities in infrastructure projects.