A group of four Filipino citizens submitted a joint complaint-affidavit to the Office of the City Prosecutor in Pasay City on June 18, 2026, seeking a preliminary investigation against Department of National Defense Secretary Gilberto Eduardo Gerardo Cojuangco Teodoro Jr. The complaint centers on an alleged discrepancy between a Maltese passport once issued in Teodoro’s name and declarations he reportedly made in a Philippine passport application filed around March 17, 2017.
What the Complainants Are Alleging
According to the complaint-affidavit, the four complainants believe that Teodoro’s statements in his 2017 Philippine passport application may have been materially inconsistent with the existence of a Maltese passport that they claim was valid from December 22, 2016 through December 22, 2026 — meaning it was active at the time the Philippine application was filed.
The complainants are lawyer Russel C. Miraflor, a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, along with Antonio Balondo Jr., Ernie Arimala, and Jerry M. Honrado. All four identified themselves as Filipino citizens and taxpayers pursuing the matter in the public interest.
In the affidavit, the four stated clearly that they were, in their own words, “not filing this case to harass, vex, or embarrass” Teodoro, and emphasized that the matter should be resolved through official documentary records rather than through what they called “conjecture or political conclusion.”
Three Laws Cited as Basis for the Complaint
The complaint-affidavit, reviewed in part by Kuryente News, cites three separate legal provisions as the grounds for the filing. First, it invokes the Philippine Passport Act of 1996, or Republic Act No. 8239, which regulates the issuance of Philippine passports and expressly prohibits material misrepresentations in passport applications.
Second, the complaint cites the falsification of a public document under the Revised Penal Code. Third, it raises the possibility of perjury, which would apply if the declarations in question were made under oath at the time of filing. The complainants also asked the Pasay City Prosecutor to constitute a panel of prosecutors specifically to handle the preliminary investigation and the process of building up the case.
Subpoenas Requested From Multiple Government Agencies
In their prayer for relief, the four complainants asked the Pasay City Prosecutor to issue subpoenas directed at several government bodies, including the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Bureau of Immigration, the Civil Service Commission, the Department of National Defense itself, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue. The purpose of these subpoenas would be to obtain certified true copies of relevant records, including passport applications, issuance and renewal data, travel histories, and any filings related to citizenship reacquisition connected to Teodoro.
Additionally, the complainants requested that official records be sought from Maltese authorities through proper diplomatic or intergovernmental channels. These would cover Teodoro’s citizenship status under Maltese law, the issuance and any surrender of his Maltese passport, and any formal renunciation he may have executed.
Where Things Stand Legally
It is important to note that all allegations remain unproven at this stage of the process. Under Philippine procedural rules, the filing of a complaint-affidavit before a city prosecutor initiates a preliminary investigation, but the prosecutor must conduct an independent assessment before any case can be brought to court. As of the filing date, Teodoro had not been required to submit a counter-affidavit or formally respond to the complaint.
Standard procedure requires the prosecutor’s office to first evaluate whether the complaint is sufficient in form and substance. Only if it meets that threshold will subpoenas be issued and the respondent directed to file a reply. The Pasay City Prosecutor’s Office had not publicly confirmed whether it had formally docketed the complaint or established a processing timeline as of June 18, 2026.
Teodoro Has Addressed the Passport Issue Before
This is not the first time Teodoro’s Maltese passport has drawn public attention. The issue first became prominent in July 2025, when the Department of National Defense released a statement saying that Teodoro’s Maltese passport “was surrendered and renounced” before he filed his certificate of candidacy in 2021 in preparation for the 2022 senatorial elections.
The DND further stated at that time that the existence of the Maltese passport had already been disclosed to the Bureau of Immigration, the Commission on Elections, and the Commission on Appointments before Teodoro’s confirmation as Secretary of National Defense — indicating that relevant authorities were made aware of the foreign citizenship prior to his appointment.
Teodoro himself acknowledged in July 2025 that he had obtained Maltese citizenship through Malta’s investment program. He said he relinquished it “through both the Philippine and the Maltese process” prior to joining the 2022 senatorial race. He dismissed attention to the issue as a “smear campaign” that he connected to his public positions on the West Philippine Sea dispute with China.
Applicable Law on Dual Citizenship and Public Office
The legal context here involves Republic Act No. 9225, known as the Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003. Under this law, natural-born Filipinos who have acquired foreign citizenship are permitted to reacquire Philippine citizenship. The statute also allows dual citizens to hold public office in the Philippines, but only on the condition that they formally renounce their foreign citizenship — before filing for elective office or before accepting an appointive government position.
Legal observers who commented on earlier coverage of the controversy noted that if Teodoro completed a valid renunciation of his Maltese citizenship before 2022, the question of eligibility would largely be settled. The current complaint, however, focuses on a narrower and distinct question: whether the declarations he made in his 2017 Philippine passport application were accurate at the time they were submitted — a factual question that hinges on the documentary record, not on what happened later.
No Response Yet From the Defense Department
As of June 18, 2026 — the date the complaint was filed — the Department of National Defense had not issued any statement addressing the new legal action before the Pasay City Prosecutor’s Office, according to available reports. Similarly, no response had been issued by Teodoro’s office.
Under the Rules on Criminal Procedure, should the prosecutor find the complaint sufficient, Teodoro will be formally notified and given the opportunity to submit a counter-affidavit. The subpoenas to agencies such as the DFA, Bureau of Immigration, and DND would then form the backbone of the documentary record needed to resolve the central factual questions raised by the complainants.
No hearing schedule or deadline for response had been publicly announced as of the date of this report. Further statements from the Department of National Defense or from Teodoro’s office are anticipated as the complaint receives broader media coverage in the coming days.
Originally reported by: Kuryente News
