Now is the time for Romualdez to speak

“I will not be the fall guy for other people’s corruption.”

Former speaker Martin Romualdez made that bold declaration on April 21, 2026, in an 11-minute video message as allegations surrounding the flood-control scandal increasingly placed him under scrutiny. In that same video message, the former House speaker said he had “seen enough,” “heard enough,” and knew “many things” about the current and past administrations. He also warned that if the controversy were brought into the court of public opinion, he would defend himself publicly.

That moment has acquired greater significance following the filing of a ₱7.44-billion plunder case against Romualdez and three others before the Sandiganbayan on Sept. 7 and his subsequent arrest hours later.

The Sandiganbayan, in issuing a warrant of arrest, expressly emphasized that its finding of probable cause does not determine guilt and that the accused remain presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Romualdez is entitled to the full protection of due process and to defend himself against every allegation.

But there is another question that the Filipino public is entitled to ask.

What does Romualdez know?

If his earlier declaration was more than a political warning, this is the moment to substantiate it.

What did he see? What did he hear? What does he know about the alleged manipulation of flood-control and other infrastructure projects? Who were the people involved? How did questionable projects allegedly make their way into government spending? Who exercised influence over their funding, implementation, and release? And, crucially, did the alleged corruption extend beyond those already facing charges?

These are not merely questions about Romualdez’s personal defense. They go to the heart of a scandal involving billions of pesos in public funds intended for infrastructure and flood protection.

The country has heard denials, accusations, and counteraccusations for months. What it needs now is evidence, testimony, and accountability.

Romualdez himself said that he would not allow himself to become a scapegoat for those who were actually responsible. If that remains his position, then silence would be difficult to reconcile with his own words.

A public official cannot invoke knowledge of wrongdoing only when political circumstances become unfavorable, then withhold that knowledge when the opportunity arises to place it before investigators and the courts.

Otherwise, the public is left to wonder whether the much-anticipated revelations were ever more than rhetoric—whether the promised “bite” behind the warning does not exist at all.

But there is an important qualification. Romualdez’s detention, whether under hospital arrest or in a regular cell, must not be used to silence him. Authorities should respect his constitutional rights, provide him access to counsel, and allow him every lawful opportunity to present evidence, testimony, and information relevant to his defense and to the broader investigation.

Transparency should not depend on which political camp benefits from it.

If Romualdez genuinely possesses information that could identify participants in the alleged corruption, the country deserves to know it. If he has evidence that could exonerate him, he should present it. If he knows of wrongdoing involving officials of the current or previous administrations, he should expose what he knows through the proper legal channels.

The flood-control scandal is bigger than one man and should not be reduced to one prosecution.

Romualdez said he would not be the fall guy.

Now is the time to show that he was not merely speaking loudly, but speaking with something substantive to say.

Filipinos are waiting to listen.