A signing delay that had publicly drawn criticism from the Office of the Ombudsman was resolved on Friday, July 4, 2026, when eight alleged former security personnel of resigned Ako Bicol party-list representative Elizaldy “Zaldy” Co formally submitted their individually signed sworn statements to the anti-graft body — converting what were previously described as non-binding draft narratives into formal sworn evidence.
Attorney Levito Baligod, counsel for the group, announced the development through a social media post, confirming that each of the eight witnesses had personally signed their respective affidavits. The completion of the signing process is a critical procedural milestone, as the Ombudsman had previously described the unsigned drafts as having no evidentiary weight in formal proceedings.
Background on the Allegations
The eight witnesses belong to a larger group of 18 individuals who came forward earlier in 2026, all represented by Baligod, claiming they had formerly worked as bodyguards and staff for Co. According to the group’s accounts, they were allegedly tasked with transporting luggage filled with cash — purported kickbacks sourced from anomalous government flood control infrastructure projects — and delivering these to various public officials under the alleged direction of Co.
Among the more striking claims, one of the alleged former bodyguards told investigators that he personally delivered approximately 20 suitcases on a single occasion. The amounts allegedly marked on each individual suitcase ranged from P40 million to P80 million. Taken together, the broader group of witnesses had earlier claimed that total deliveries ran into hundreds of billions of pesos in supposed illicit payments.
The Ombudsman’s Earlier Concern Over Unsigned Drafts
The formal submission followed a public statement made on July 2 by Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano IV, who acknowledged that investigators found the testimonies of the eight to be “categorical and consistent” — particularly in their accounts of alleged cash deliveries involving former House Speaker Martin Romualdez and Co himself. Clavano also indicated that these testimonies would be incorporated into the case being built against Romualdez.
However, Clavano had expressed frustration at the time, warning that the affidavits remained legally worthless in their unsigned state. “A mere scrap of paper as of right now because it has not been signed and is not under oath,” Clavano said, according to reports. He noted that draft affidavits had been provided to Baligod as early as June 20, but that the counsel’s group had requested additional time for review — a delay that the Ombudsman publicly flagged.
Why Only Eight of 18 Witnesses Were Selected
The Ombudsman explained that not all 18 individuals who came forward were deemed credible enough to produce individual affidavits. Only eight of the 18 accounts were found to be sufficiently substantive for the purposes of case-building. The remaining witnesses, according to the anti-graft office, provided accounts that were either too broad or lacked direct, first-hand knowledge of the alleged cash deliveries themselves.
To properly assess each witness’s individual claims, Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla ordered that separate sworn statements be prepared for each of the eight — rather than relying on a single collective affidavit. The anti-graft office conducted one-on-one interviews with the witnesses during June, and the National Bureau of Investigation was separately deputized to verify the identities and backgrounds of those involved, the Ombudsman confirmed.
How the Investigation Reached This Point
When the 18 alleged former bodyguards and staff first surfaced in 2026 with their allegations, they submitted a single joint affidavit to the Ombudsman as a group. Ombudsman Remulla, however, rejected that joint submission as insufficient for building a credible case, and ordered each individual to produce a separate sworn statement so that investigators could evaluate the merits of each person’s account independently.
The allegations prompted strong reactions from several members of the legislature, with a number of lawmakers filing cyberlibel and criminal complaints against those making the claims, publicly denouncing the accusations as malicious and without factual basis.
Case Remains at Fact-Finding Stage; No Charges Filed
Despite the significant procedural progress, the Ombudsman has been careful to stress that no determination has been made regarding the credibility of the witnesses or the culpability of any of the named respondents. The anti-graft body emphasized that such determinations ultimately rest with the courts, should formal charges eventually be filed following the conclusion of its fact-finding process.
As of July 3, 2026, the allegations remain unproven, and no formal charges have been filed in connection with the described cash deliveries. The Ombudsman’s case build-up against the named respondents, including former House Speaker Romualdez, continues.
By the Numbers
- 8 — witnesses who signed and formally submitted individual affidavits to the Ombudsman
- 18 — total individuals who originally came forward with allegations against Co
- 20 — suitcases allegedly transported by one witness in a single delivery
- P40 million to P80 million — range of amounts reportedly 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 signed, sworn affidavits marks a decisive procedural shift, elevating what the Ombudsman had previously dismissed as legally worthless draft documents into sworn evidence that can be used in formal case proceedings. Should the allegations be substantiated, they would implicate senior government figures — including a former House Speaker — in the large-scale diversion of public funds intended for flood control infrastructure. The Ombudsman’s ongoing fact-finding process will determine whether the evidence gathered is sufficient to bring formal charges before the courts.
Source: Originally reported by wire reports
