Romualdez: Guteza's accounts unreliable even before recantation

The accounts of Orly Guteza, the former bodyguard of ex-Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Zaldy Co, have long been unreliable before his recantation, the camp of former Speaker Martin Romualdez said Monday.

Romualdez said that Guteza’s affidavit, which was submitted before the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee flood control probe, was found forged by the Manila Regional Trial Court in October 2025 because the signature on the supposed notarized affidavit was falsified and did not belong to the notary public stated in the document.

“Orly Guteza’s first affidavit was already under a cloud before he took it back,” the Romualdez camp said in a statement.

Likewise, the Leyte lawmaker's camp invoked the September 2025 denials of Co’s aides and bodyguards Mark Bunagan and Allan Colesio, whom Guteza identified as the ones who can corroborate his statements in his Senate blue ribbon panel affidavit.

“The document’s supposed notary denied signing it, a Manila court treated it as falsified, and the people Guteza named as possible corroborators rejected the alleged cash deliveries. This is why the Office of the Ombudsman cannot presume that Guteza’s first version is true and treat his recantation as the only disputed statement,” the Romualdez camp added, referring to Guteza’s recantation, which only happened this month.

The Romualdez camp also argued that Guteza’s allegations that certain individuals made him link Romualdez to the flood control mess should not be taken lightly by the Ombudsman.

“At the very least, these sworn statements materially impair the credibility and reliability of the principal witness pool of the complainant [Ombudsman] Special Panel of Investigators, taint the admissibility of the Affidavits attached to the Complaints, and prevent the Complaints from meeting the threshold of prima facie evidence with reasonable certainty of conviction,” Romualdez said in his counter-affidavit.

The Office of the Ombudsman is investigating Romualdez for plunder, graft, bribery and money laundering in connection with Guteza's allegations and the supposed defrauding of the national budget.

Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano earlier assured the public that the recantation of Guteza and three other previous accusers of Romualdez does not mean that the Ombudsman does not have evidence against Romualdez.

“Hindi po tama na dahil lang po may recantation, nabura na yung dati nilang sinasabi. Ang legal effect po niyan ay itatabi po yung dating affidavit doon sa bagong affidavit,” Clavano said in a press conference last week.

(To say that a recantation is an erasure of account is wrong. The legal effect of that recantation is that the new affidavit will be compared with the initial affidavit.)

“Dagdag ebidensya po yan. Hindi siya nakabawas sa ebidensya ng investigators natin,” Clavano added.

(That is additional evidence. The recantation did not reduce the evidence that our investigators already have.) —LDF, GMA News