Sandiganbayan Denies Bid to Drop Ex-DPWH Chief Bonoan From Flood Control Graft Case

In a recent ANC 24/7 report, the Sandiganbayan Second Division issued a 12-page resolution on Monday denying the Office of the Ombudsman's motion to exclude former Department of Public Works and Highways secretary Manuel Manligas Bonoan from the flood control graft case. The ruling came after the prosecution filed its "Motion for Leave to File Amended Information (Re: Exclusion of Accused Manuel Manligas Bonoan)" on June 29. This decision keeps Bonoan as a co-accused alongside Senator Jinggoy Estrada in proceedings centered on alleged kickbacks from projects in Bulacan.

Sandiganbayan Keeps Bonoan in Estrada Flood Control Case

Manila, Philippines – Monday — The Sandiganbayan Second Division denied the motion for lack of merit and stressed that removing Bonoan would shift the case from conspiracy-based liability to individual liability for Estrada, prejudicing the senator who has already entered a plea. The court found Estrada will be prejudiced if the amendment will be allowed at this stage of the proceedings.

Sandiganbayan Second Division Rejects Exclusion Motion

The Sandiganbayan Second Division denied the motion for lack of merit. The court stated that removing Bonoan would shift the case from conspiracy-based liability to individual liability for Estrada, prejudicing the senator who has already entered a plea.

Under Rule 110, Section 14 of the Rules of Court, amendments after a plea cannot prejudice the accused. The resolution explicitly noted that Estrada would face altered criminal liability if the change occurred at this stage.

The Sandiganbayan was clear that the ruling does not close the door on the state witness route: "The prosecution is not precluded from subsequently seeking accused Bonoan's discharge as a state witness as it remains at liberty to seek his discharge at the appropriate stage of the proceedings, provided that the requisites under the rules are met." The court added that the proposed amended information "removes the only co-accused and purported conspirator of accused Estrada from the case, thereby modifying the theory of criminal liability from one predicated on conspiracy to one imposing individual liability on the part of accused Estrada."

By upholding the requirement that changes after a plea cannot alter the accused's position, the court reinforces consistent handling of cases that reach the anti-graft body from the Office of the Ombudsman.

Ombudsman Pushes State Witness Plan Despite Setback

Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla warned on August 1 that Bonoan must provide complete information or remain a co-accused. Remulla stated investigators found Bonoan's answers on multibillion-peso flood control projects inadequate and described the testimony as potentially half-baked.

Remulla gave Bonoan an ultimatum to disclose all details, including restitution, or face trial with former House speaker Martin Romualdez. The Office of the Ombudsman may abandon the discharge effort if cooperation falls short.

Remulla was blunt about the stakes: "I told him that if the value of his testimony is half-baked, we'd rather not use it and just proceed with the case against him." The Ombudsman also pressed Bonoan for full disclosure, saying, "I want him to be forthcoming about everything and provide complete information. He shouldn't hold back any information, especially regarding restitution."

The possibility that the Office of the Ombudsman may drop the effort if information remains insufficient highlights the balance between securing testimony and maintaining charges in proceedings that also involve Senator Jinggoy Estrada.

P573 Million Plunder Charges Against Estrada and Bonoan

The Ombudsman charged Estrada and Bonoan in May with plunder and graft over an alleged flood control kickback scheme. Bonoan faces a non-bailable P573 million plunder charge tied to an accumulated sum of illicit payouts delivered to the senator.

Estrada allegedly received 30 percent kickbacks after channeling P355 million into flood control projects in Malolos and Hagonoy, Bulacan. Both men were arrested and held in custody before Bonoan's scheduled arraignment on July 1.

The Ombudsman alleged that "an accumulated sum of illicit payouts amounting to an aggregate sum of over P573 million" were delivered to Senator Jinggoy Estrada. The motion to exclude Bonoan was filed before his arraignment on July 1, part of the strategy to secure his cooperation and testimony against other accused in the scheme. Estrada's camp opposed the move, and the Sandiganbayan ultimately agreed that the amendment would unfairly change the legal theory of the case at this stage.

Broader Flood Control Scandal Engulfs Multiple Officials

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. filed charges against his cousin, former House speaker Martin Romualdez, on July 28 in the same scandal. On the same day, the Sandiganbayan ordered the arrest of Rep. James "Jojo" Ang Jr. over DPWH contracts.

Senator Panfilo Lacson submitted Taguig evidence to the Ombudsman on July 29 while the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee probes P14.4 billion in ghost projects. The National Bureau of Investigation chief announced around 30 additional flood control cases will reach the Department of Justice soon.

These overlapping actions affect taxpayers across Metro Manila and Bulacan by showing how multiple institutions coordinate to trace public works funds, which determines the pace at which accountability measures reach local infrastructure projects.

The NBI's 30 additional cases now moving toward the Department of Justice add pressure on the Office of the Ombudsman to complete its review of DPWH contracts in flood-prone provinces. The July 28 charges against Romualdez and the arrest order for Rep. Ang expand the scope of the investigation beyond the original Bulacan projects.

Lacson's July 29 submission of Taguig evidence to the Ombudsman and the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee's probe into P14.4 billion in ghost projects illustrate how Senate and judicial tracks run parallel, forcing barangay officials and sari-sari store owners in affected areas to wait longer for completed drainage systems.

Impact on Filipino Taxpayers and Communities

Families in Bulacan provinces such as Malolos and Hagonoy continue to face flooding risks while public funds meant for protection allegedly flowed into kickback schemes. Taxpayers in Quezon City and Pasay bear the cost of delayed infrastructure when cases drag through the Sandiganbayan.

Workers at the Department of Public Works and Highways in the National Capital Region now operate under heightened scrutiny as the Office of the Ombudsman and National Bureau of Investigation pursue parallel probes. Communities expect accountability from institutions tasked with protecting public resources.

The expectation of restitution and full disclosure from accused officials shapes how communities in these areas view the effectiveness of institutions in recovering resources and preventing similar issues in future public works allocations.

Key Developments to Monitor in Coming Weeks

Romualdez is expected to submit his counter-affidavit within days as the preliminary investigation advances. The prosecution may still seek Bonoan's discharge as a state witness at a later stage provided all legal requisites are met.

The Sandiganbayan Second Division will continue hearings on the remaining accused, including Estrada. The Office of the Ombudsman will decide whether to proceed with full charges against Bonoan if his cooperation remains incomplete.

Questions of Accountability in Anti-Graft Institutions

The denial reinforces that the Sandiganbayan prioritizes procedural fairness even when the Office of the Ombudsman seeks to convert an accused into a witness. This approach affects how future cases involving Congress members and DPWH officials reach resolution.

Filipino voters in districts across Bulacan and Metro Manila watch whether the justice system can recover misused funds and prevent similar schemes in upcoming public works projects. The outcome will shape public trust in the Department of Justice and the anti-graft court.

This ruling signals that future anti-graft cases will face stricter scrutiny on conspiracy theories and plea-stage amendments, potentially lengthening proceedings but strengthening procedural safeguards that protect accused officials and reassure taxpayers that evidence must meet clear standards before charges shift.

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Reporting is based on sources cited in the article.