The Market Monitor Minding the Nation's Business
Spokespersons for Leyte 1st District Rep. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez on Thursday rejected allegations linking the former House Speaker to alleged anomalous flood control projects, insisting that no evidence has ever connected him to any irregularity in the planning, funding or implementation of the infrastructure projects.
In a statement, lawyer Elaine Atienza said neither Senate and House investigations nor official probes have produced evidence showing that Romualdez participated in the planning, procurement, implementation, inspection, payment or release of funds for any alleged ghost flood control project.
She added that even former Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Secretary Manuel Bonoan, who oversaw the agency, never implicated the Leyte lawmaker.
“Simple lang kung bakit — because Rep. Romualdez was not involved,” Atienza said.
She also argued that the accusations ignore how the national budget process works, explaining that the National Expenditure Program is prepared by the Executive branch through the Department of Budget and Management and implementing agencies, including the DPWH, before being submitted to Congress for deliberation and approval.
According to Atienza, the Speaker of the House has no authority to direct Cabinet secretaries, senators, or implementing agencies, nor does the position exercise control over project bidding, contract awards, inspections, payments, or the release of government funds once the budget has been enacted.
“To claim that Rep. Romualdez was the alleged mastermind would mean believing that one person controlled every stage of the budget and infrastructure process,” she said.
“If there were irregularities in any infrastructure project, then those who actually exercised legal and operational authority should be identified and held accountable. Accountability must follow the evidence—not political convenience,” she added.
Atienza further claimed that Romualdez has been made a “convenient excuse and political scapegoat” despite the absence of evidence directly linking him to the alleged anomalies.
“Sa paghahanap ng hustisya, hindi puwedeng mauna ang akusasyon bago ang ebidensya. Sa batas, ang ebidensya ang nagtuturo kung sino ang mananagot,” she said.
In a separate statement, another spokesperson, lawyer Ade Fajardo, questioned the credibility of Bonoan, describing the former DPWH secretary as a “very biased” source who should not be treated as a key witness.
Fajardo said Bonoan had never mentioned Romualdez in previous investigations, including before the Independent Commission on Infrastructure, and expressed concern over reports that the Office of the Ombudsman intends to use Bonoan’s testimony in its probe.
He also cited allegations made by former DPWH undersecretary-turned-state witness Roberto Bernardo that Bonoan supposedly received ₱1 billion in kickbacks from flood control projects, saying such claims should instead be investigated.
Fajardo argued that Bonoan’s alleged attempt to implicate Romualdez surfaced only after seeking state witness status, raising questions about the timing and credibility of the accusations.
He also suggested that efforts to link the former House Speaker to the alleged irregularities were intended to bolster claims that a “big fish” was involved because of Romualdez’s ties to President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.
Despite the allegations, Fajardo said Romualdez is prepared to face any complaint that may be filed against him and has no intention of evading legal proceedings.
“There is no attempt, not even a thought, by the former Speaker to avoid his obligations or accountability, if there is any,” Fajardo said, adding that Romualdez continues to maintain that there was no anomalous transaction involving him.