Romualdez Camp Rejects Plunder Case Claims: Clarification on Flood Control Investigation

Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez camp has firmly rejected claims that he should face plunder charges in connection with flood control and budget issues. In a statement through his legal representative, the camp emphasized that the Independent Commission for Infrastructure made clear its referral did not constitute a finding of guilt.

Background on the Investigation

Former Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez's legal team issued a comprehensive response to recent statements regarding the investigation. Attorney Ade Fajardo, serving as Romualdez's legal spokesperson, clarified several misunderstandings about the investigation process.

Key Points of Clarification

Fajardo categorically denied reports suggesting that the Independent Commission for Infrastructure recommended filing plunder or other serious charges against Romualdez. According to the camp's statement, "We take note of the DPWH Secretary's statement. However, it is important to clarify that a DPWH recommendation is not a finding, much less a determination of guilt."

The legal team emphasized that Department of Public Works and Highways statements should not be construed as proof of wrongdoing. A departmental recommendation is fundamentally different from a legal finding.

ICI Report and No Finding of Guilt

Romualdez's camp highlighted a critical detail from the ICI's referral report. The report explicitly stated it was issued "without finding or conclusion of guilt or liability on the part of former Speaker Romualdez." This distinction is significant in legal proceedings and underscores the absence of adverse conclusions against the former Speaker.

The camp also noted that the ICI itself underscored this absence of adverse conclusion when it forwarded the matter to the Office of the Ombudsman.

Fajardo's Statement on Due Process

Fajardo expressed confidence in institutional processes and stated that Romualdez respects the Ombudsman's mandate to assess the matter independently and fairly. He noted, "We respect due process and will await the Ombudsman to independently evaluate the submissions based on evidence, not press conference soundbites."

Next Steps and Institutional Respect

The Romualdez camp remains committed to supporting the proper institutional processes. They are confident that the Ombudsman will thoroughly and fairly evaluate all submissions presented based on evidence and legal standards.

This case highlights the importance of distinguishing between administrative recommendations, investigation referrals, and actual legal findings. As the matter proceeds through the Ombudsman's office, all parties involved await an independent and fair evaluation.