The state's case against Sen. Rodante Marcoleta ended not with a bang but with a stipulation: after nearly an hour of argument over whether two more witnesses were worth calling, both sides agreed the paperwork was genuine and moved on.
State prosecutors formally rested their case on Thursday, Oct. 8, in the plunder trial of Sen. Rodante Marcoleta at the Sandiganbayan, which concerns ₱75 million in campaign donations he allegedly received in 2025, according to the Daily Tribune's Jerod Orcullo. The prosecution is due to submit its formal offer of evidence on Oct. 15; the defense is expected to begin its presentation when trial resumes on Oct. 19.
An hour of argument, then a stipulation
Per the Tribune, the fight was over two remaining witnesses: Pasig Regional Trial Court Clerk of Court Atty. Lucia Paula Corrales and Atty. Cecil Federizo, both connected to the notarization of deeds of donation from three of Marcoleta's donors. The defense sought to exclude both. Defense lawyer Atty. David Gabriel invoked attorney-client privilege for Federizo, saying she had also been Marcoleta's counsel at the time.
Prosecutor Joshua Tan countered that privilege does not automatically bar a witness and can be raised through objections during testimony. He said prosecutors wanted to explore alleged irregularities in the notarization, noting, in the Tribune's account, that "all entries on that day is done by a single person using a ballpen" apart from three documents.
Associate Justice Fritz Delos Santos questioned why the witnesses mattered at all, since both sides had already stipulated during the bail hearings that the notarized documents were authentic. Defense lawyers called the approach a "fishing expedition." The dispute ended with both sides agreeing the documents were "authentic, genuine, and duly executed," with Corrales identified as their custodian.
The notarization irregularities Tan wanted to explore, then, will go unexplored in open court, at least by the prosecution. Whether they surface through the defense or in the offer of evidence is not yet known.
What the case is about
GMA News reported in July that the Ombudsman filed plunder and related charges at the Sandiganbayan over ₱75 million in campaign contributions, allegedly received in three payments: ₱30 million on Jan. 6, 2025, ₱25 million on Jan. 8, and ₱20 million on Jan. 9. Prosecutors allege the money was left out of Marcoleta's 2025 SALN and Statement of Contributions and Expenditures, and that he accepted an "unconscionable" gift. Per GMA reporters Joseph Morong and Llanesca Panti, the Ombudsman said he "fell short of upholding the standard of responsibility and integrity."
Former congressman Michael Defensor and businessmen Joseph Espiritu and Aristotle Viray are co-accused on gift-ban charges under Presidential Decree 46, which bars public officials from receiving gifts and private individuals from giving them. The Philippine Star's Ghio Ong reported that Marcoleta pleaded not guilty to plunder on July 22, after withdrawing his motion to quash the information, and that the accused were being held at the Quezon City jail in Payatas.
Marcoleta has said publicly: "If the intention of these cases is to silence me... It has failed. I will not be silenced," per GMA. Defensor said: "The law cannot have one standard for political opponents and another for political allies."
What is still unknown
The defense is, per Gabriel, still finalizing its witness list, and Marcoleta himself is among those being considered. Nothing in the reporting says what the defense will argue to explain the money. The Tribune account does not say what the court will make of the notarization questions, and the prosecution's formal offer of evidence has not yet been made public.
Context
The case is among the Ombudsman's high-profile prosecutions of sitting and former lawmakers, running alongside the plunder case against former Speaker Martin Romualdez. Under the Sandiganbayan's process, the court decides plunder on proof of ill-gotten wealth of at least the statutory threshold; the stipulated authenticity of the donation deeds narrows the dispute to what those documents mean, not whether they exist.
Sources
- Daily Tribune (Jerod Orcullo), "Prosecution rests plunder case vs Marcoleta," Oct. 8, 2026 — https://tribune.net.ph/2026/10/08/prosecution-rests-plunder-case-vs-marcoleta
- GMA News (Joseph Morong, Llanesca T. Panti), "Ombudsman files plunder case against Marcoleta before Sandiganbayan," July 3, 2026 — https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/993578/ombudsman-p75m-charges-marcoleta-sandiganbayan/story/
- The Philippine Star (Ghio Ong), "Marcoleta, Defensor plead not guilty," July 23, 2026 — https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2026/07/23/2544099/marcoleta-defensor-plead-not-guilty/amp/