A procedural hurdle in one of the country's most closely watched graft investigations was cleared on Friday, July 4, 2026, when the legal counsel of eight self-described former security personnel of resigned Ako Bicol party-list representative Elizaldy "Zaldy" Co confirmed that all eight had signed and formally submitted their individual sworn affidavits to the Office of the Ombudsman — just 24 hours after the anti-graft office had publicly warned the documents were legally worthless without signatures.
Atty. Levito Baligod announced the development through a social media post, confirming that each of the eight witnesses had personally signed their respective sworn statements. Baligod serves as counsel for the group of self-proclaimed former bodyguards and staff members who have come forward with sweeping allegations involving the transport of cash-filled suitcases to multiple government officials.
From Unsigned Drafts to Formal Sworn Evidence
The significance of the signing cannot be understated procedurally. Prior to July 3, 2026, the statements existed only as unsigned draft documents — narratives that the Ombudsman itself described as having no binding legal weight. With signatures now affixed and the documents formally placed under oath, the accounts can be incorporated into the case build-up currently being assembled by the anti-graft office.
Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano IV had issued a stark warning just one day earlier, on July 2, describing the unsigned affidavits as "a mere scrap of paper as of right now because it has not been signed and is not under oath." Clavano also noted that draft affidavits had been furnished to Baligod as early as June 20, with the group having sought an extension for review — a delay the anti-graft official attributed to the counsel's side.
Despite the delay, Clavano said the Ombudsman found the accounts of the eight witnesses to be "categorical and consistent," particularly with respect to alleged cash deliveries made to former House Speaker Martin Romualdez and to Co himself. According to Clavano, the testimonies are expected to be folded into the ongoing case build-up being prepared against Romualdez.
What the Witnesses Allege
The eight signatories are part of a broader contingent of 18 individuals who came forward earlier in 2026 alleging they had been tasked to transport luggage filled with cash — purportedly representing kickbacks from anomalous government flood control projects — to various public officials, all allegedly acting upon the directives of Co.
Among the more striking individual claims is that of one witness who told investigators he personally delivered approximately 20 suitcases in a single instance, with amounts allegedly marked on each suitcase ranging from P40 million to P80 million. The group as a whole had previously claimed the total value of all deliveries ran into hundreds of billions of pesos in supposed illicit funds.
Why Only Eight of 18 Were Pursued
The Office of the Ombudsman did not treat all 18 accounts equally. According to the anti-graft body, only eight of the 18 submitted accounts were deemed sufficiently credible and specific to warrant further action. The remaining witnesses were set aside because their statements were characterised as consisting of "broad statements" or because they lacked direct, first-hand knowledge of the actual cash deliveries they described.
To strengthen the credibility and individual accountability of each account, Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla had earlier rejected an initial joint affidavit submitted by the group as insufficient. Remulla ordered each witness to produce a separate, individually tailored sworn statement so that investigators could evaluate each person's claims on their own merits, independent of the others.
The Ombudsman conducted one-on-one interviews with the witnesses during June as part of its fact-finding process. Separately, the National Bureau of Investigation was deputized by the Ombudsman to independently verify the identities and backgrounds of the witnesses before their accounts could be given further weight, according to the anti-graft office.
How the Investigation Began
The probe traces its origins to earlier in 2026, when 18 individuals — all represented by Baligod — came forward collectively claiming to have served as bodyguards or staff members of Co. They alleged they had transported cash-laden luggage to several named public officials on multiple occasions. Their initial submission to the Ombudsman took the form of a single consolidated joint affidavit.
Remulla's rejection of that joint filing and his insistence on individual affidavits was a deliberate prosecutorial strategy aimed at allowing the Ombudsman to isolate and assess each witness's specific knowledge and direct participation, rather than relying on a collective, undifferentiated account. The requirement also makes it harder for defense lawyers to undermine multiple witnesses by attacking a single shared document.
The allegations have not gone unanswered. Several lawmakers named or implicated in the claims have filed cyberlibel and criminal complaints against those making the accusations, publicly characterising the allegations as malicious and without factual basis.
Case Still at Fact-Finding Stage; No Charges Filed
The Office of the Ombudsman has been careful to clarify the current limits of the proceedings. The anti-graft body has stressed that it has not made — and is not yet making — any determination on the ultimate credibility of any witness or the guilt or innocence of any respondent. According to the Ombudsman, those questions will be for the courts to resolve if and when formal charges are eventually filed.
As of July 3, 2026, all allegations remain unproven. No charges have been filed in connection with the claimed cash deliveries, and the matter remains firmly within the investigative and case-building phase of the Ombudsman's process.
By the Numbers
- 8 — witnesses who signed and submitted individual sworn affidavits to the Ombudsman
- 18 — total individuals who originally came forward with allegations against Co
- 20 — suitcases allegedly transported by one witness on a single delivery occasion
- P40 million to P80 million — range of amounts purportedly marked on individual suitcases
- June 20 — date on which draft affidavits were first provided to the witnesses' counsel
Why This Matters
The formal submission of individually signed, sworn affidavits removes a critical procedural obstacle and allows the Ombudsman to treat the eight accounts as actionable sworn evidence rather than unverified drafts — a meaningful step forward in a case targeting senior government figures, including former House Speaker Martin Romualdez. Should the allegations be substantiated through the continuing fact-finding process, they would point to a large-scale scheme diverting public funds from government flood control infrastructure projects for illicit purposes. The Ombudsman's eventual decision on whether to file formal charges will determine if the matter advances to the judicial system, where the claims would be tested under full adversarial proceedings.
Source: Originally reported by Balita / breakingnewsnegros.com wire reports