MANILA—The camp of former Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez challenged the credibility of Orly Guteza, the former bodyguard of ex-Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Zaldy Co, whose allegations linked Romualdez to the alleged flood control scam.

The Romualdez camp said Guteza’s statements had already been questioned even before he recently recanted his allegations.

It cited an affidavit Guteza submitted to the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee’s flood control investigation, which the camp said was found to be forged by the Manila Regional Trial Court in October 2025.

According to the camp, the signature on the purported notarized affidavit was falsified and did not belong to the notary public identified in the document.

“Orly Guteza’s first affidavit was already under a cloud before he took it back,” the Romualdez camp said in a statement.

The camp also pointed to September 2025 statements from Co’s former aides and bodyguards Mark Bunagan and Allan Colesio, whom Guteza had identified as individuals who could corroborate his allegations before the Senate panel.

“The document’s supposed notary denied signing it, a Manila court treated it as falsified, and the people Guteza named as possible corroborators rejected the alleged cash deliveries. This is why the Office of the Ombudsman cannot presume that Guteza’s first version is true and treat his recantation as the only disputed statement,” the Romualdez camp said.

Romualdez is facing an investigation by the Office of the Ombudsman over allegations of plunder, graft, bribery and money laundering in connection with Guteza’s accusations and the alleged defrauding of the national budget.

The former Speaker’s camp also urged the Ombudsman to consider allegations that certain individuals pressured Guteza to implicate Romualdez in the flood control controversy.

“At the very least, these sworn statements materially impair the credibility and reliability of the principal witness pool of the complainant [Ombudsman] Special Panel of Investigators, taint the admissibility of the Affidavits attached to the Complaints, and prevent the Complaints from meeting the threshold of prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction,” Romualdez said in his counter-affidavit.

The Ombudsman, however, has maintained that Guteza’s recantation does not automatically eliminate the evidence previously submitted against Romualdez.

Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano said last week that the earlier and more recent affidavits would both be considered by investigators.

“Hindi po tama na dahil lang po may recantation, nabura na yung dati nilang sinasabi. Ang legal effect po niyan ay itatabi po yung dating affidavit doon sa bagong affidavit,” Clavano said in a press conference last week.

“Dagdag ebidensya po yan. Hindi siya nakabawas sa ebidensya ng investigators natin,” Clavano added.

Meanwhile, Romualdez’s lawyer Ade Fajardo reiterated his call for the Ombudsman to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the former Speaker is not directly implicated by any credible witness in the alleged flood control scheme.

“Wala po kaming nakikitang dahilan kaya ang aming panalangin, ang aming hiling sa tanggapan ng Ombudsman ay i-dismiss na po ito, ibasura na itong reklamo laban kay former Speaker Romualdez,” Fajardo said in a statement sent to the media.

Fajardo claimed that 32 previous witnesses, including Guteza, had withdrawn their accusations against Romualdez. He said these witnesses were former personnel of Co, who is facing an arrest warrant from the Sandiganbayan over his alleged involvement in the flood control controversy.

“Wala pong credible witness, kasi nga marami ng naglabasan na mga cross witnesses na sinasabing walang nangyaring ganyang delivery ng maleta eh. Eto po ay galing na sa iisang grupo. Pareho silang mga drivers, security, administrative aides of former Congressman Zaldy Co,” he said.

Fajardo also said no witness had directly connected Romualdez to the alleged delivery of kickbacks.

“Kahit si secretary, dating Kalihim (Manuel) Bonoan ay hindi naman nagsalita tungkol dito, hindi naman siya nag-ugnay kay Congressman Romualdez sa flood control scam ano. Walang ganung testimonya,” he said.

He added that no district engineer, assistant district engineer, or other personnel on the ground had implicated Romualdez in any particular flood control project.

“Wala rin kahit sinong district engineer or assistant district engineer o kahit sinong personnel on ground, kasi nga wala namang iniuugnay na kahit anong particular na proyekto tungkol sa flood control na hindi nangyari or hindi ginawa or pinakialaman ni former Speaker Romualdez,” he said.

Fajardo further said no contractor had implicated the Leyte lawmaker.

He also questioned the Ombudsman’s statement that it had 28 new witnesses against Romualdez, saying the defense had yet to learn their identities.

“’Yun ang naging statement last week ng tanggapan ng Ombudsman. Pero hanggang ngayon po hindi pa namin nakikita or nababasa or nalalaman kung sino itong 28 witnesses,” he added.