Plunder, bribery complaint ‘legally insufficient,’ says Marcoleta

MANILA, Philippines — Sen. Rodante Marcoleta said the plunder and indirect bribery complaint lodged in the Office of the Ombudsman against him over campaign donations worth P75 million is “legally insufficient”.

Marcoleta addressed the accusation in his counter affidavit, received by the Ombudsman on June 5 but was only furnished to the media over the weekend.

“The Complaint-Affidavit is legally insufficient because it does not establish the elements of the offenses charged,” the counter affidavit stated.

Article continues after this advertisement

Marcoleta noted the donation made by former Rep. Mike Defensor, and a certain Joseph Espiritu and Aristotle Viray were not public funds, despite state prosecutors’ saying that the donated funds exceeded the P50 million threshold for plunder under Republic Act (RA) 7080.

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

READ: Marcoleta on plunder, bribery raps: At least I stated truth

“There is no question that the allegations in the Complaint-Affidavit do not constitute that I amassed, accumulated, or acquired ill-gotten wealth within the contemplation of the Plunder Law,” the complaint stated.

“The allegations fail to constitute ‘ill-gotten wealth’ within the contemplation of RA 7080 because the alleged acts do not bear the character of a systematic and economically destructive corruption that the Plunder Law was enacted to punish,” it continued.

The counter-affidavit reiterated that donations of the three individuals were made before the campaign period, which is why the amount was not stated in his statement of contribution and expenditures (Soce) he submitted to the Commission on Elections.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Marcoleta already ‘confessed’ on TV show, Remulla says of plunder raps

The campaign period for 2025 elections began on Feb. 11, or a month after the alleged donation was made. The counter-affidavit also cited Supreme Court’s 2009 ruling stated that a candidate is only liable for election offenses only upon the start of the campaign period

Article continues after this advertisement

State prosecutors also noted that this P75 million donation was not declared in his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN) as of June 30, 2025.

Instead, the complaint noted that Marcoleta only declared P39.6 million in his SALN, which he said he acquired from 1992 to June 30, 2025. In his December 2025 SALN, the complaint said Marcoleta only declared cash and savings in the amount of P16.7 million.

In response, Marcoleta said: “The donations were likewise not reflected in my Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) because, by the time the SALNs were prepared and executed, the amounts had already been used for their intended election-related purposes and were no longer assets held by me.”

Marcoleta’s counter-affidavit said the matters regarding SALN and Soce do not provide the “essential statutory nexus” that is required to establish plunder and bribery charges.

Instead, the counter affidavit said the complaint “appears to be calculated or orchestrated in such a way as to distract public attention from, or to undermine, the legislative scrutiny and examination of failures in governance, the situation becomes even more complex.”

The Sandiganbayan has since granted a precautionary hold departure order (PHDO) against Marcoleta, Defensor, Espiritu, and Viray upon the petition of the Office of the Ombudsman.

READ: Sandiganbayan issues travel ban vs Marcoleta, 3 others

A PHDO is a written court order directing the Bureau of Immigration to prevent any attempt by a person suspected of a crime punishable by a minimum penalty of at least six years and one day from leaving the country.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

This order is based solely on the finding that there is a high likelihood that the respondent will flee the country and does not determine the respondent’s guilt. /cb