MANILA — A team leader of the group of former security personnel who accused government officials of taking kickbacks from flood-control projects has rejected Sen. Erwin Tulfo’s statement that witnesses in the investigation are backing out one by one.
Johnny Buduan said the remaining witnesses and their counsel, Atty. Levito Baligod, are standing firm and are not afraid of any investigation into the alleged corruption.
“Kayo ang umaatras at takot diyan sa Blue Ribbon Committee,” Buduan told Tulfo.
The exchange marks the sharpest public friction yet between the witnesses at the centre of the flood-control controversy and the senator leading the chamber’s inquiry into it.
Who the witnesses are
Buduan belongs to a group of 18 former security personnel of former Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Zaldy Co. Coverage of the scandal has referred to them as the “Brave 18” and, in some reports, as the “maleta boys” — a reference to their claim that kickbacks from flood-control projects were delivered to public officials in suitcases.
Baligod has acted as their counsel since November 2025, alongside politician Mike Defensor. The group said publicly it was prepared to appear before the Senate and repeat its allegations despite complaints filed against its members and questions raised about their credibility.
Buduan was identified during congressional hearings as an alleged bagman tasked with delivering money to officials. He was among the first in the group invited by the Office of the Ombudsman for investigation.
The recantations behind the dispute
Tulfo’s assertion that witnesses are withdrawing refers to a series of retractions that have narrowed the group over recent months.
The Manila Times reported on Aug. 8, 2026 that the Ombudsman tagged former Speaker Martin Romualdez as being behind the retractions of four key witnesses in the flood-control case. Witness Orly Guteza separately recanted a sworn statement that had named Leyte Rep. Martin Romualdez. Reports on the Guteza recantation noted that investigators did not regard it as a bar to the wider inquiry.
Buduan’s reference to “B14+3” reflects the group’s own count of who remains behind the original allegations.
The possibility of recantations was flagged early in the case. In November 2025, Sen. Imee Marcos said witnesses in the Blue Ribbon flood-control probe should be expected to recant, citing threats against them.
A Senate inquiry repeatedly interrupted
The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee’s handling of the case has been marked by procedural disputes. An invitation to the 18 former security personnel was revoked and later restored. Hearings were postponed more than once before the committee resumed its investigation into what senators have called the flood-control mess.
Tulfo has said the fate of the probe rests with the senators themselves, and has previously accused minority senators of blocking it. The committee has also issued partial findings and recommendations as the inquiry progressed.
What happens next
The remarks followed the committee’s decision to leave the next steps to the Office of the Ombudsman. Tulfo has argued that pursuing the matter through the Ombudsman could produce accountability faster than continuing the Senate inquiry.
That shifts the criminal track away from the Senate. The Ombudsman has the power to conduct its own fact-finding and, where warranted, to file cases before the Sandiganbayan — a route that does not depend on witnesses appearing at televised hearings.
For the witnesses still standing by their statements, the practical question is whether the Ombudsman route offers the protection that the Senate inquiry did not.
What our readers said
Breaking News Negros Oriental reviewed 344 comments left on its own coverage of this story. The most common theme was sympathy, prayers or condolence, appearing in 56 of 329 comments carrying text — about 17 per cent.
Other recurring themes were safety, security or fear (34), questions about timing or priorities (29), appreciation or thanks (27), criticism of government or officials (25).
Themes were identified by keyword analysis of comment text. The sample reflects the reaction of this publication’s readers rather than a scientific survey of public opinion, and individual commenters are not identified.
Reporting by Breaking News Negros Oriental. Background drawn from published reports by the Manila Times, Philippine Daily Inquirer, GMA News, Philstar and the Daily Tribune. This article concerns an ongoing investigation. All allegations described are unproven and no court has ruled on them.
