Ombudsman Seeks Recusal of Justice Moreno in Revilla Malversation Trial

The Office of the Ombudsman has asked Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Ronald Moreno to inhibit himself from former Senator Ramon Bong Revilla Jr.’s malversation trial, citing alleged bias and improper conduct during bail hearings for a disputed 92.8-million-peso flood control project.

The Ombudsman’s Push for Recusal

The Office of the Ombudsman officially requested that Associate Justice Ronald Moreno step away from the malversation case involving former Senator Ramon Bong Revilla Jr., pointing to what prosecutors describe as unwarranted conduct against prosecution witnesses. In a 69-page motion filed by the Office of the Special Prosecutor, the anti-graft body argued that circumstances in the courtroom reasonably give rise to a perception of partiality.

The legal maneuver follows a contentious division vote that granted Revilla provisional liberty after spending roughly six months in detention at the New Quezon City Jail in Payatas. While Sandiganbayan Third Division Chairperson Associate Justice Karl Miranda voted to deny the bail petition, Moreno and Associate Justice Fritz Bryn Anthony delos Santos voted in Revilla’s favor, allowing him to post a 1-million-peso cash bond on July 31, 2026.

Questioning Demeanor and Cross-Examination Volume

At the heart of the Ombudsman’s motion is the sheer volume and tone of questioning directed at state witnesses by Moreno during the bail hearings. Prosecutors tallied the exact number of questions posed by the magistrate compared to the defense counsel, revealing an imbalance that they argue crossed the boundary from clarificatory inquiry into active cross-examination.

Ombudsman Seeks Recusal of Justice Moreno in Revilla Malversation Trial — Photo: mb.com.ph

During the testimonies of former Department of Public Works and Highways Undersecretary Roberto Bernardo, former district engineer Henry Alcantara, and contractor representative Sally Santos, Moreno posed 290, 210, and 430 questions respectively. By comparison, defense lawyers asked 210, 190, and about 170 questions to the same witnesses.

“Justice Moreno’s partial attitude against the prosecution witnesses, and his statements in open court suggesting that there is no evidence against accused Revilla as proponent in the infrastructure project subject of this case … are indicative of partiality and bias against the prosecution.”

Office of the Special Prosecutor, via Inquirer

The motion also highlighted specific exchanges, including an instance where Moreno questioned Alcantara regarding his complicity in the scheme with the remark, Pero wala ka ngang ebidensya, wala naman [siyang ipinakita].

The Underlying Bulacan Flood Control Case

The underlying criminal case centers on an alleged ghost flood control project in Pandi, Bulacan, valued at 92.8 million pesos, which investigators found had no physical structure. Prosecutors allege that Revilla acted as a project proponent who secured funding in the 2025 General Appropriations Act in exchange for a percentage cut of advance commitments.

In its July 31 resolution penned by Delos Santos, the anti-graft court ruled that the prosecution failed to present strong evidence of guilt or prove the elements of conspiracy. The court noted that the evidence did not yet establish how exactly Revilla facilitated the inclusion of the project in the budget or agreed to receive advance kickbacks.

Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Boying Remulla confirmed the filing of the motion for voluntary inhibition, noting that while the prosecution does not impute bad faith, the court’s appearance of neutrality must be preserved. Remulla also stated that the bail outcome was expected and that he plans to coordinate with the Supreme Court on broader institutional issues surrounding flood control project implementation.

Legal Stinctions and Next Steps

The Ombudsman’s separate 15-page motion for reconsideration, filed to overturn the grant of provisional liberty, argues that the evidence demonstrates substantial public funds were paid to SYMS Construction despite the project remaining unimplemented. Prosecutors maintain that Revilla served as the central figure of the scheme, receiving the lion’s share of proceeds while remaining in the background during project execution.

Ombudsman to discuss Revilla's bail grant with Chief Justice | ANC

Legal experts note that seeking a judge’s inhibition is an extraordinary remedy governed strict procedural rules. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that mere imputations of bias are insufficient without concrete grounds establishing a conflict of interest or compromised impartiality. The Sandiganbayan Third Division must now resolve whether Moreno will step aside as the prosecution prepares to present its evidence-in-chief.