At A Glance
- * The Ombudsman said recantations do not erase previous statements but become additional evidence for investigators to examine.
- * Romualdez's lawyer maintained that the OMB had no case against him, citing the recantations of 32 witnesses.
- * The OMB said investigators would compare the conflicting statements to determine which account is truthful.
(JEL SANTOS/MB PHOTO)
Responding to earlier statements made by the camp of former House speaker Martin Romualdez, the Office of the Ombudsman (OMB) said a recantation does not erase a witness’ previous statement but instead becomes additional evidence that investigators must evaluate.
On Thursday, Aug. 27, Romualdez’s legal counsel reiterated that the OMB had no case against the former House speaker in connection with alleged flood control project anomalies.
Lawyer Ade Fajardo said there was no basis for filing charges against Romualdez, citing the recantations of 32 witnesses, including alleged bagman Orly Guteza.
In its statement on Thursday, the OMB said investigators would examine both the original statement and the recantation to determine which account is truthful.
“Hindi eraser ang recantation. In fact, dagdag ebidensya po iyon. Dahil dalawa ang statement, itatabi ang dalawa at susuriin kung alin sa dalawa ang totoo (A recantation is not an eraser. In fact, it constitutes additional evidence. Since there are two statements, they will be compared and examined to determine which one is true),” Assistant Ombudsman Jose Dominic Clavano IV, the OMB spokesperson, said.
The OMB pointed out that the existence of two conflicting statements means one of them contains falsehoods.
“Hindi eraser ang recantation. Actually, ibig po sabihin, isa sa statements ay sinungaling. Alin po ba dito ang talagang pinanindigan nung mga tao? Bakit biglang nagtago pagkatapos mag-recant? Bakit maraming info na binayaran para mag-recant? Ito ang mga dapat tanungin (A recantation is not an eraser. Actually, it means that one of the statements is false. Which statement do these people truly stand by? Why did they suddenly go into hiding after recanting? Why is there a lot of information indicating that they were paid to recant? These are the questions that should be asked),” Clavano said.
Likewise, the anti-graft body accused some individuals of attempting to confuse the public about the meaning and effect of a recantation.
“Hindi eraser ang recantation. Pero gusto ng iba na malito ang taumbayan sa meaning ng recantation (A recantation is not an eraser. But some people want to confuse the public about what a recantation means),” he added.
On July 17, Ombudsman Jesus Crispin “Boying” Remulla said the OMB was “very close” to filing plunder charges against Romualdez over alleged irregularities in flood control projects.