The camp of former House Speaker and Leyte 1st District Representative Martin Romualdez firmly asserted on Thursday that there is absolutely no proof connecting the lawmaker to allegedly anomalous flood control projects.
The statement, issued by his spokesperson Elaine Atienza, came in response to speculations that former Public Works Secretary Manuel Bonoan had agreed to turn state witness and implicate several individuals, including Romualdez, in the infrastructure controversy.
Atienza pointed out that during his previous appearances before investigative panels, Bonoan—who possessed direct oversight of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) operations—never once tied Romualdez to the issue.
“Simple lang kung bakit— because Romualdez was not involved,” Atienza stressed.
She further explained that the allegations directed at the former House leader reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of how the national budget is formed and executed.
“The issue traces back to the national budget process. Sa prosesong iyan, no single person, not even the Speaker of the House, can control,” she said.
According to Atienza, the National Expenditure Program originates within the executive branch via the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and implementing agencies like the DPWH. It is only then forwarded to both chambers of Congress for standard legislative deliberations.
“No Speaker can dictate upon Cabinet secretaries. Neither can he dictate upon senators, who exercise their own independent constitutional mandate. Sila po ay pantay-pantay diyan being elected officials. Primus inter pares,” Atienza said.
“Hindi niya saklaw ang pagpapa-release ng budget. Those are functions vested by law in the Executive Branch,” she added.
“Hindi kayang utusan ng Speaker ang DPWH secretary. Hindi niya kayang diktahan ang DBM o ang Senado. At lalong hindi siya ang nagpa-plano ng proyekto, nagpapa-bid, nag-a-award ng kontrata, nag-iinspeksyon, o naglalabas ng pondo,” she pointed out.
Atienza argued that framing Romualdez as the “mastermind” behind the scheme falsely assumes that a single politician could micro-manage the entire government’s budgetary and infrastructure framework.
“Ang gustong palabasin ng iba, parang iisang tao ang may hawak ng buong gobyerno. Hindi po ganoon ang ating Konstitusyon,” Romualdez’s spokesperson 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,” Atienza added.
“Kung may nagkasala, papanagutin natin. Pero huwag nating gawing shortcut ang paghahanap ng isang malaking pangalan para lang may maipakita sa publiko,” Atienza said.
Ultimately, Atienza lamented that Romualdez is merely being used as a “convenient excuse and political scapegoat” despite a complete lack of substantiating evidence.
“At the end of the day, justice demands only one standard,” Atienza added. “Sa paghahanap ng hustisya, hindi puwedeng mauna ang akusasyon bago ang ebidensya. Sa batas, ang ebidensya ang nagtuturo kung sino ang mananagot.”