A former national president of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) says that attempts to brand former House Speaker, Leyte 1st district Rep. Martin Romualdez as the "mastermind" of the flood control projects mess reeks of prejudgment.

Lawyer Ade Fajardo, Romualdez’s counsel, pointed out Tuesday, Sept. 1 that the Office of the Ombudsman's preliminary investigation was still ongoing, and that the evidence was yet to be fully evaluated.

Fajardo said such a label could create the impression that a conclusion had already been reached before these things could be completed.

Romualdez’s lawyers had asked Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla to inhibit from the case in an April 22 letter.

The lawyers maintained that Remulla's public pronouncements, including repeated references to prosecution, created an appearance of prejudgment.

“Well, sa amin pong appreciation, at kami ay nangangamba na dahil sa maraming mga pampublikong posisyon ng kasalukuyang Ombudsman ay parang na-prejudge na, or parang meron nang konklusyon na nabuo, at hinahabol ang ebidensiya para lang masuportahan 'yung…legal conclusion na sa amin namang palagay ay wala nga,” Fajardo said.

(Well, in our appreciation, we are concerned that because of the current Ombudsman’s many public statements and positions, it seems that the matter has already been prejudged, or that a conclusion has already been reached, and the evidence is merely being pursued to support a legal conclusion that, in our view, simply does not exist.)

Under due process, a preliminary investigation determines whether there is sufficient basis to bring charges before a court.

Fajardo said public accusations should not get ahead of that process, particularly while witness accounts are changing and additional evidence has yet to be furnished to the defense.

“Ang naging problema namin diyan kasi nga at this stage po ng investigation, ang hinihiling po ng ating mga alituntunin at ng ating batas at mismong Saligang Batas ay fairness and impartiality,” he noted.

(Our problem with that is that at this stage of the investigation, what our rules, our laws, and the Constitution itself require is fairness and impartiality.)

The ex-IBP offcial said derogatory labels could shape public opinion even before investigators have resolved conflicting statements and examined the complete record.

“Ang tawag namin po diyan ay prejudicial, at in effect parang ginagatungan 'yung anumang kaisipan,” he said.

(We call that prejudicial, and in effect, it seems to fuel whatever line of thinking may already exist.)

Fajardo urged the Ombudsman to resolve the complaints based on evidence properly disclosed and weighed during the proceedings, rather than on labels made public while the investigation remains pending.

The Ombudsman earlier said it was looking at a possible plunder charge against Romualdez.