Remulla to Supreme Court: Time to review anti-plunder law amid flood control scandal

Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin "Boying" Remulla speaks to reporters after taking his oath before Supreme Court Associate Justice Marvic Leonen as the new Ombudsman during a ceremony at the Supreme Court in Manila on Wednesday, Oct. 9, 2025.

The STAR / Edd Gumban

MANILA, Philippines — In his first year at the Office of the Ombudsman, Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla has urged the Supreme Court to revisit the anti-plunder law.

In his speech on Monday, October 12, Remulla said that securing convictions faces a major legal hurdle: the 2016 Supreme Court ruling in Macapagal-Arroyo v. People.

“Kaya sinasabi ko ito nang may buong paggalang sa Kataas-taasang Hukuman: panahon na para balikan ang doktrinang ito. It is time to revisit it,” Remulla said in his speech.

(That is why I say this with all due respect to the Supreme Court: it is time to revisit this doctrine. It is time to revisit it.)

The doctrine, according to Remulla, introduced two requirements not originally written by Congress into the plunder law: first, that the prosecution must identify a "main plunderer"; and second, that it must prove the accused personally received or benefited from the stolen funds.

“Think about what that means. The smarter the thief, the safer he is. Pass the money through enough dummies, middlemen and shell companies, and no one can be shown to have touched it,” Remulla said.

He argued that while the plunder law was designed to hold those who steal billions accountable, the current doctrine makes the largest syndicates the hardest to catch.

“Hindi po iyan hustisya. Pananggalang po iyan,” he said.

(That is not justice. That is a shield.)

Remulla added that the ongoing flood control cases mirror the complex, multi-layered schemes protected by the current plunder doctrine.

“Let us not forget the size and magnitude of this scandal. Over a hundred billion pesos was paid for flood control projects that were never built,” Remulla said.

“Hindi substandard. Hindi kulang. Wala talaga,” he added.

(Not substandard. Not lacking. There is nothing at all.)

Philstar.com has reached out to the Supreme Court for comment on Remulla’s pronouncement, but it has yet to reply.