MANILA — The Sandiganbayan has denied former lawmaker Bong Revilla’s motion asking the court to have Associate Justice Karl Miranda inhibit from his graft and malversation case.

In a seven-page resolution dated February 10, the anti-graft court ruled that Revilla’s claims of partiality were “speculative” and lacked extrinsic evidence.

“Associate Justice Miranda’s voluntary inhibition in this case is therefore unwarranted as Revilla failed to present any extrinsic evidence to establish the former’s bias, bad faith, malice, or corrupt purpose. Revilla’s bare allegations of partiality and prejudgment will not suffice,” the ruling read.

Revilla had sought Miranda’s recusal due to the latter’s ties with lawyer Buenaventura Miranda, his brother, who represented former Undersecretary Roberto Bernardo before the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearings. He argued that recusal would “remove any lingering doubt about his impartiality.”

The Sandiganbayan noted that neither Miranda’s brother nor Bernardo is a party to the current case.

“Atty. Miranda is neither a party nor a counsel to any of the parties in this case. Similarly, Usec. Bernardo is not a party to this case but is only listed as a witness in the information,” the court said.

It added that should Bernardo testify, it would be the prosecution, not Buenaventura Miranda, handling his judicial affidavit and testimony.

The court also highlighted that Miranda had disclosed his relationships with his brother and one of Revilla’s lawyers, Ramon Esguerra, as early as the issuance of commitment orders. It found that none of the mandatory inhibition grounds under the 2025 Code of Judicial Conduct and Accountability applied.

“In this case, Revilla failed to demonstrate any act or conduct that indicates Associate Justice Miranda’s bias or partiality. Other than the imputation of ‘lingering doubt’ on Associate Justice Miranda’s impartiality, Revilla failed to indicate any circumstance that Associate Justice Miranda exhibited bias and prejudice towards him,” the court said.

Revilla filed the motion days after the anti-graft court issued resolutions denying his earlier motions to quash his arrest warrant and the information against him.

The case involves alleged anomalies in a P92.8 million flood control project in Pandi, Bulacan, which the Office of the Ombudsman said was non-existent.

On February 9, Revilla refused to enter a plea on the graft case, prompting the Sandiganbayan to enter a not guilty plea on his behalf. Arraignment for the malversation case has been moved to February 16.