The Office of the Ombudsman has called for fair and accurate reporting on the ₱75-million plunder case involving Senator Rodante Marcoleta before the Sandiganbayan.
In a statement, the Ombudsman raised concerns over a published report that it said inaccurately characterized the testimony of Luzon Field Investigation Bureau Director Maria Melinda Mananghaya-Henson during one of the court hearings.
The report said there was no evidence showing that the three businessmen accused of giving Marcoleta ₱75 million had met or communicated with one another.
The three individuals, along with Marcoleta, are co-accused in the plunder case filed by the Ombudsman. The case stemmed partly from Marcoleta’s admission that he received ₱75 million as a donation for his 2025 senatorial campaign.
The Commission on Elections previously absolved Marcoleta in a case involving the non-declaration of the campaign donation. However, the Ombudsman cited his argument that the money was given before the official election period in pursuing the plunder complaint.
According to the Ombudsman’s case, Marcoleta received the money while he was still serving as a congressman. The agency argued that accepting the funds under such circumstances could constitute a bribe and fall under the plunder law because the amount exceeded the ₱50-million threshold.
The report also stated that the ₱75 million allegedly donated by former Anakalusugan Party-list Representative Mike Defensor and businessmen Joseph Espiritu and Aristotle Viray was intended to finance Marcoleta’s 2025 senatorial campaign. This was based on notarized deeds of donation presented during the bail hearings.
The Ombudsman, however, emphasized that Mananghaya-Henson’s testimony addressed only specific questions concerning whether there was evidence that the three alleged donors had personally met or communicated with each other.
It said the testimony should not be interpreted as resolving the broader issues surrounding the case.
The disputed report also said documentary evidence contradicted Marcoleta’s position that the funds were his personal money, while noting that no collusion among the four accused had been established because there was no proof that they had met.
The Ombudsman cautioned that presenting selected portions of testimony without the surrounding context could give the public an inaccurate understanding of the evidence being considered by the Sandiganbayan.
“Let us be very clear, there is very strong evidence on record which warranted the filing of the case. The ongoing hearings should be allowed to proceed without isolated portions of testimony being portrayed as determinative of the entire case,” the statement read.
The agency further stressed that court proceedings should be considered as a whole rather than through individual portions that could be interpreted differently when taken out of context.
“Court proceedings must be understood in its entirety and parts of it cannot just be taken and twisted into a different narrative.”
The Ombudsman also acknowledged the importance of independent journalism while urging news organizations to observe accuracy and fairness, particularly when covering cases involving public officials.
“The Office of the Ombudsman respects the vital role of a free and independent press in informing the public. However, that role comes with the responsibility to report accurately, fairly and with appropriate context, especially in cases of significant public interest.,” it added.