The Office of the Ombudsman has downplayed the recent retraction by retired Marine Orly Guteza regarding his testimony against former House Speaker and Leyte 1st District Representative Martin Romualdez, clarifying that its ongoing investigation into the flood control issue relies on far more than a single source.
In a official statement released Thursday, August 20, the anti-graft oversight body noted that witness retractions are a regular occurrence in significant cases and frequently function as intimidation tactics.
“Hindi bago ang recantation sa mga high-profile case. Classic pressure tactic ito. Hindi umiikot ang buong imbestigasyon sa iisa o kahit sa iilang witnesses,” the Ombudsman stated.
The response came after Guteza executed a new affidavit reversing claims about his involvement in carrying suitcases containing money to Romualdez’s Forbes Park address during his tenure on the security detail of former Ako Bicol Party-list Representative Zaldy Co.
Guteza retracted his claims of taking part in three separate cash deliveries, alleging that Senator Rodante Marcoleta and former Anakalusugan Party-list Representative Mike Defensor coerced him into making the accusations.
Despite the shift in testimony, the Ombudsman affirmed that the retraction will not undermine its inquiry into the former Speaker. The oversight agency revealed that it has secured nearly thirty other witnesses who can provide direct, relevant testimony regarding the matters under review.
“Sa kabila nito, ipinapaalam ng Office of the Ombudsman na mayroon itong DALAWAMPU’T-WALONG (28) testigo na nakahandang magbigay ng direkta at materyal na kaalaman sa mga transaksyong sinisiyasat sa kaso ni dating Speaker Martin Romualdez,” the agency added.
The agency confirmed that these witnesses consist of active-duty uniformed personnel who have been formally bound by legal processes. The declaration underscores that the overall inquiry was never anchored exclusively on Guteza’s initial allegations.
Reminding individuals named in its directives of their legal obligations, the agency stressed that compliance is mandatory.
“Sa lahat ng nabigyan na o mabibigyan pa ng legal na proseso, hindi choice ang pakikipagtulungan. Obligasyon ‘yan sa batas,” the Ombudsman noted.
The anti-graft body warned against any efforts to disrupt its proceedings.
“Sinuman ang mangahas humadlang, mangbara o manggulo sa proceedings ng Ombudsman ay haharap sa buong bigat ng batas,” the agency warned.
Concluding its statement, the Ombudsman reiterated its resolve to see the probe through regardless of witness shifts.
“Hindi hihinto ang paghahanap ng katotohanan kahit ayaw pang magsalita ninuman,” the office stated.