Martin Romualdez files bail petition amid P7.4B plunder raps

Make this your preferred source to get more updates from this publisher on Google.

Leyte Rep. Martin Romualdez on Monday filed a petition for bail amid a P7.4 billion plunder case leveled against him over his alleged involvement in the flood control mess.

In a 60-page petition, the former House speaker said the Ombudsman’s evidence against him are only enough to raise suspicions, rather than certainty, and not enough to keep him detained

These insufficient evidence, Romualdez said, include:

• the accounts of former DPWH Undersecretary Roberto Bernardo and former Bulacan First District Engineer Henry Alcantara ("Alcantara") concerning alleged dealings with his co-accused and former House appropriations panel chaiperson Elizaldy "Zaldy" Co of Ako Bicol party-list over contractor "commitments"
• the statements of eight security aides of accused Co, three of whom have since recanted, describing the transport of luggage to properties said to be associated with accused Romualdez
• accusing Romualdez of involvement by virtue of his office as Speaker of the House of Representatives and the passage of appropriations measures in the ordinary course of legislation; and
• the corporate and financial transactions of a certain Jose Paras and of companies in which Paras is the principal shareholder.

“None of them strongly establishes accused Romualdez’s knowing participation in the alleged scheme or his acquisition of its proceeds. Bernardo and Alcantara describe dealings with accused Co. The security aides describe the movement of luggage and, on a few occasions, the sight of cash, but not its source, its amount, or its receipt by accused Romualdez,” the bail petition read.

“The Speakership is an office, not an act. The corporate and financial records describe the affairs of Paras and his companies. At every point where the narrative passes from the conduct of others to accused Romualdez, the connection is supplied by inference from what precedes it rather than by a proven circumstance of accused Romualdez’s own conduct. That is the difference between a prima facie finding sufficient to file an Information and the proof evident or presumption great required to deny bail,” it added.

In addition, Romualdez said that the prosecution’s evidence does not show his knowledge, direction, or benefit as with his participation in the racketeering scheme.

“None of it is strong on the matters that identify him as the guilty agent, and a combination of equivocal circumstances does not meet the standard. Wherefore, premises considered, accused Romualdez respectfully prays that this Honorable Court: set the instant Petition for Bail for hearing, at which the Prosecution shall be required to present its evidence to show that the evidence of guilt against accused Ferdinand Romualdez is strong, and accused Romualdez shall be afforded the opportunity to controvert the same,” the petition read.

“And thereafter, find that the Prosecution has not established proof evident or presumption great of the guilt of accused Romualdez for the offense charged, that the evidence of his guilt is not strong, and that he is not a flight risk, and grant the instant Petition for Bail,” it added.

Romualdez’s petition also asked the Sandiganbayan to fix a reasonable amount of bail, with such sureties as the anti-graft court may require. —AOL, GMA News