Marcoleta, 3 ‘friends’ charged with P75-M plunder; Iglesia ni Cristo protests

Despite three days of protest by members of the Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC), Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla on Friday fulfilled his commitment to file a plunder case against Sen. Rodante Marcoleta before the Sandiganbayan over the P75 million the lawmaker admitted receiving from three “friends” who were named as his coaccused. The case against Marcoleta and the three others—former Anakalusugan Rep. Mike Defensor, and businessmen Aristotle Viray and Joseph Espiritu—was raffled to the antigraft court’s Third Division. Plunder is a nonbailable offense. “This was not a decision made lightly or by choice,” the Office of the Ombudsman said in a statement announcing the filing. Marcoleta and his coaccused were also charged with violating Presidential Decree No. 46, which prohibits public officials and employees from receiving, and private individuals from giving, gifts. This case went to the Sandiganbayan’s Fourth Division. Marcoleta, who will be 73 on July 29, is the first member of the INC to be elected senator. In his defense, he said the money came from private funds and had already been spent as campaign funds during the May 2025 midterm polls. He also alleged that the case was planned to prevent him from participating as senator-judge in the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte and from pursuing the investigation of high officials involved in the flood control kickback scandal. In large rallies in December 2024 and January 2025, the INC—known for bloc voting—declared its opposition to the impeachment of the daughter of ex-President Rodrigo Duterte. Remulla announced last Monday his intention to file a plunder case against Marcoleta “this week.” This prompted an immediate response from the INC, whose members staged a rally in support of the senator at the Edsa People Power Monument in Quezon City early on Tuesday, causing a gridlock at one of Metro Manila’s major arteries. The number of protesters dwindled to several hundreds at Liwasang Bonifacio by the time an INC spokesperson announced on Thursday the end to the protest after supposedly sending their message to the authorities not to impose “selective justice” and “bend the law.” “We recognize this case has stirred intense public debate, and we respect every citizen’s right to an opinion, to rally, and to demand accountability, including from us,” the Ombudsman’s statement said. But it added that the evidence against Marcoleta and his coaccused “leaves our office no discretion to look away.” It said the facts were not disputable as the senator himself “publicly confirmed” receiving the money. In an interview with the INC-run Net25 network on Nov. 7, 2025, Marcoleta admitted that when he was still a congressman, his “friends” gave him P75 million in “campaign contributions” for a senatorial run, on the condition that he would not disclose their identities. His friends’ names were revealed in a fact-finding report in March by the Commission on Elections (Comelec), after it looked into his statement of contributions and expenditures (Soce) for the May 2025 midterm polls. The donation wasn’t declared in his Soce. The amounts donated—P30 million from Defensor, P25 million from Espiritu and P20 million from Viray—were cited in the plunder and bribery complaints recommended by the field investigation bureau of the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon. In December 2025, the poll watchdog Kontra Daya and the Advocates for Public Interest Law filed complaints of perjury against Marcoleta before the Ombudsman as he had not disclosed the P75-million donation in his Soce. In March, the Comelec cleared Marcoleta of any election offense related to the nondisclosure of the P75 million. Comelec Chair George Garcia cited a 2009 Supreme Court ruling which said that a candidate is liable for election offenses only upon the start of the campaign period. The senator’s donors, however, did not declare their contributions and were liable for an election offense, according to the Comelec report. In a counteraffidavit he had submitted to the Ombudsman before the plunder case was filed, Marcoleta said that the P75-million donation was not taken from public funds, even if the total exceeded the P50-million threshold for plunder under Republic Act No. 7080. Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano has repeatedly pointed out that plunder can be committed even if no public funds were involved. The Ombudsman’s office said that the P75 million was not reflected in Marcoleta’s statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) as of June 30, 2025. He had declared only P39.6 million, which he said he acquired from 1992 to June 30, 2025. In his December 2025 SALN, he declared only cash and savings amounting to P16.7 million. In his counteraffidavit, Marcoleta said that the donation was not reflected in his SALN because when it was prepared, “the amounts had already been used for their intended election-related purposes and were no longer assets held by me.” Marcoleta also said that he considered the money as an “utang na loob” (debt of gratitude) to his friends. The Ombudsman’s statement acknowledged that debt of gratitude was one of the Filipino culture’s “most beautiful values.” “But it has no place in public office,” it said. “The moment gratitude is used to explain away P75 million in undisclosed money, it stops being ‘utang na loob’ and becomes exactly what our plunder and bribery laws were written to prevent.” Kontra Daya lead convenor Danilo Arao believes the plunder case against the senator would prosper because the evidence was “very, very strong” based on Marcoleta’s own remarks that he could not deny. “As regards to the P75 million being ill-gotten wealth, that would need to be argued well by the Ombudsman, and we are confident that the concept of ill-gotten [wealth] can be interpreted in such a way that he was initially quiet about it,” he said in an interview with the Inquirer. Arao hoped that the Ombudsman would not dismiss the perjury complaint Kontra Daya had filed against Marcoleta. He noted that the Ombudsman had referred the case to the Comelec, but the poll body has yet to make a decision on the matter. “From our standpoint as an election watchdog, we don’t want a situation where future candidates will adopt what we call the ‘Marcoleta Formula’ in filling out the Soce,” Arao said. “It sets a very dangerous precedent. So, that’s why the pressure is bigger on both the Ombudsman and the Comelec to act decisively on Marcoleta, especially with the elections happening in 2028,” he added. In a Facebook post on June 30, the first day of the INC protest rallies, Marcoleta alleged that his possible arrest on plunder charges was meant stop his efforts to uncover the truth and hold certain individuals behind the flood control scandal accountable. “Another thing they are hoping for is that I will no longer be able to participate in the impeachment proceedings scheduled to begin next week. In other words,