Senator Marcoleta rejects plunder case, says P75-M donation complaint lacks legal basis

Senator Rodante Marcoleta has described the plunder and indirect bribery complaint filed before the Office of the Ombudsman over P75 million in alleged campaign donations as “legally insufficient.”

In a counter-affidavit received by the Ombudsman on June 5, Marcoleta argued that the accusations fail to establish the essential elements of the charges.

“The Complaint-Affidavit is legally insufficient because it does not establish the elements of the offenses charged,” the counter-affidavit stated.

He stressed that the funds allegedly given by former Rep. Mike Defensor, Joseph Espiritu, and Aristotle Viray were private donations and not public money, countering prosecutors’ position that the amount exceeded the P50-million threshold for plunder under Republic Act 7080.

“There is no question that the allegations in the Complaint-Affidavit do not constitute that I amassed, accumulated, or acquired ill-gotten wealth within the contemplation of the Plunder Law,” the complaint stated.

He further argued that the supposed acts cited in the case do not meet the legal definition of “ill-gotten wealth,” saying they lack the pattern of large-scale corruption required under the law.

“The allegations fail to constitute ‘ill-gotten wealth’ within the contemplation of RA 7080 because the alleged acts do not bear the character of a systematic and economically destructive corruption that the Plunder Law was enacted to punish,” it continued.

Marcoleta also maintained that the donations were made before the official campaign period, which is why they were not reflected in his Statement of Contributions and Expenditures (SOCE). The 2025 campaign period began on Feb. 11, about a month after the alleged donations.

The counter-affidavit also cited a 2009 Supreme Court ruling stating that election liability only attaches once the campaign period has started.

Prosecutors, however, noted that the P75 million was not declared in his Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) as of June 30, 2025. They pointed out that Marcoleta reported P39.6 million in assets accumulated from 1992 to mid-2025, and later declared only P16.7 million in cash and savings in his December 2025 SALN.

Marcoleta countered that the funds were no longer reflected in his SALN because they had already been spent for election-related purposes.

“The donations were likewise not reflected in my Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) because, by the time the SALNs were prepared and executed, the amounts had already been used for their intended election-related purposes and were no longer assets held by me.”

He added that the allegations fail to establish the “essential statutory nexus” needed to support plunder and bribery charges, and suggested the complaint may be politically motivated and intended to divert attention from governance issues.

“The complaint appears to be calculated or orchestrated in such a way as to distract public attention from, or to undermine, the legislative scrutiny and examination of failures in governance, the situation becomes even more complex.”

Meanwhile, the Sandiganbayan has issued a precautionary hold departure order (PHDO) against Marcoleta, Defensor, Espiritu, and Viray upon the request of the Ombudsman, barring them from leaving the country while the case is being evaluated.

A PHDO is a court directive issued to the Bureau of Immigration to stop individuals suspected of crimes punishable by at least six years and one day in prison from departing the Philippines.