Plunder, bribery raps eyed vs Marcoleta over P75M campaign donation

[Updated May 22, 11:46 p.m.]

MANILA, Philippines — The Office of the Ombudsman’s deputy bureau is recommending charges of plunder and three counts of indirect bribery against Sen. Rodante Marcoleta over alleged campaign donations worth P75 million.

The field investigation bureau of the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon was the complainant of the criminal complaint lodged on May 18, according to the complaint-affidavit obtained by Inquirer on Friday.

Aside from Marcoleta, three of his donors—namely former Rep. Mike Defensor and a certain Joseph Espiritu and Aristotle Viray— are also facing plunder and indirect bribery complaints.

READ: Comelec: Complications delaying Marcoleta’s case

In January 2025, Defensor, Espiritu and Viray allegedly donated P30 million, P25 million and P20 million for Marcoleta’s senatorial bid, the complaint stated.

According to the complainant, the amount Marcoleta received as donations is above the P50 million threshold for the crime of plunder.

Meanwhile, complainants said Marcoleta also failed to observe the norms of public officials under Section 4 of the Republic Act No. 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials.

“As clearly established from the records, Respondent used his position to unjustly enrich himself in violation and utter disregard of norms of conduct and ethical standards he is expected to observe,” the complaint stated.

“Respondent Marcoleta’s acceptance of gifts with an aggregate amount of P75 million on three separate occasions constitute the crime of plunder,” the complaint stated.

According to the complaint, Marcoleta should also be charged with indirect bribery “for accepting the gifts from private individuals, which although not given as consideration for a specific act, were actually given because of his position or potential influence as a public officer.” 

Donation not reflected in SALN

The complaint stated that this P75 million donation was not declared in his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN) in the Senate as of June 30, 2025.

READ: Lacson: Marcoleta didn’t deny seeking P500-M ‘allocables’

Instead, the complaint noted that Marcoleta only declared P39.6 million in his SALN, which he said he acquired from 1992 to June 30, 2025.

In his December 2025 SALN, the complaint said Marcoleta only declared cash and savings in the amount of P16.7 million.

“The amount declared in his entry SALN in the Senate did not reflect the PhP75,000,000.00 worth of donations,” the complaint said.

“While Respondent Marcoleta’s failure to declare the donations/contributors from Respondents Defensor, Espiritu, and Viray did not constitute any election offense, his acts as discussed above should nevertheless give rise to criminal and administrative liabilities,” the complaint further stated.

The complaint also noted that Marcoleta declared “no cash or in kind contributions” in his statement of contribution and expenditures (Soce) he submitted to the Commission on Elections.

Comelec chairman George Erwin Garcia previously noted that Marcoleta received donations prior to the start of the campaign period of the 2025 elections.

The campaign period for 2025 elections began on Feb. 11, or a month after the alleged donation was made.

Supreme Court’s 2009 ruling said that a candidate is only liable for election offenses only upon the start of the campaign period, and Garcia had said this has implications on Marcoleta’s case.

Because of this, the Comelec ruled that Marcoleta did not commit any election offense.

Meanwhile, the Office of the Ombudsman, in an order on May 21, directed  Marcoleta, Defensor, Espiritu, and Viray to submit a counter-affidavit within a non-extendible period of 15 days. Complainants should then file their reply five days upon the receipt of their counter affidavits.

In March, the Comelec’s Political Finance and Affairs Department terminated the investigation on Marcoleta’s case.

Inquirer sought the comment of the camp of Marcoleta, as well as Defensor, Espiritu, and Viray. We will post their side once available.

On `allocables‘

It was Sen. Panfilo Lacson, in his privilege speech on March, who brought up that Marcoleta’s “admission” regarding the donations could fall under indirect bribery.

Lacson also accused Marcoleta of allegedly receiving P500 million in “allocables,” according to a note by the late Public Works Undersecretary Maria Catalina Cabral.

The term “allocable” refers to a fund that is officially included in a government agency’s appropriation in favor of a project to be identified by a lawmaker.

Lacson made the revelation on May 6, or after he unveiled portions of the Blue Ribbon Committee’s partial report on the flood control probe.

On May 12, Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano confirmed that Lacson’s office transmitted the partial committee report to the Ombudsman. /apl /mr