Marcos: Co, other fugitives will be arrested this year

By Erika Mae P. Sinaking

PRESIDENT Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. is confident that former Party-list Rep. Elizaldy S. Co, who is accused in a multibillion-peso graft case, and other high-profile fugitives hiding overseas would be apprehended and returned to the Philippines within the year, Malacañang said on Thursday.

Palace Press Officer Clarissa A. Castro said the President is not frustrated by the slow pace of Mr. Co’s arrest, citing his confidence in law enforcement agencies and the Department of Interior and Local Government, which are coordinating efforts to track the former congressman abroad.

“The President remains confident in the work being done by our agencies, especially in pursuing fugitives,” Ms. Castro told a Palace briefing in Filipino. “We cannot say that the President is frustrated, because he knows that the heads of government agencies pursuing fugitives are carrying out their work in accordance with his directives.”

The case against Mr. Co is part of a broader graft scandal involving misuse of public funds, procurement irregularities and corruption linked to flood control projects. The controversy has eroded public trust and triggered multiple investigations, alongside calls for tighter oversight and stronger accountability mechanisms.

Mr. Co, the former chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, is accused of graft and malversation in connection with a P289.5-million “ghost” flood control project in Naujan, Oriental Mindoro. His co-accused are already in custody. Mr. Co has denied the allegations and has sought relief from the courts while abroad.

Earlier on Thursday, the Supreme Court released Mr. Co’s petition against Ombudsman Jesus Crispin C. Remulla, showing that the verification and certification of the filing were notarized in Sweden on Jan. 15. The document carried an apostille from Nacka, Sweden, indicating that Mr. Co personally appeared before a Swedish notary public, who verified his identity and witnessed the signing of the documents.

The filing added a layer of complexity to efforts to locate the former lawmaker. Interior Secretary Juanito Victor C. Remulla earlier said Mr. Co had been last tracked in Lisbon, Portugal, underscoring the challenges authorities face in pinning down his whereabouts.

Apart from Mr. Co, Philippine authorities are also pursuing other fugitives believed to be outside the country. Businessman Charlie “Atong” Tiu Hay Sy Ang is believed to be either in Cambodia or Thailand. Mr. Ang faces multiple kidnapping charges filed before courts in Santa Cruz and Los Baños in Laguna province, as well as in Lipa City, Batangas, over the disappearance of at least 34 cockfighting enthusiasts.

Former presidential spokesman Herminio “Harry” L. Roque is also outside the Philippines and is in Vienna, Austria. He faces a qualified human trafficking case linked to now-illegal Philippine Offshore Gaming Operations, a sector that has been the subject of intensified scrutiny by authorities.

Analysts said that alongside efforts to arrest suspects, the government’s push to recover misused public funds could play a practical role in strengthening cases tied to the flood control probe. While restitution is not mandated by law, it may influence prosecutorial strategy and public perception.

Edmund S. Tayao, president and chief executive officer of Political Economic Elemental Researchers and Strategists, said restitution is not a legal requirement for inclusion in the government’s Witness Protection Program, but may signal cooperation.

“That is not a requirement enshrined in law,” he said by telephone. “However, in legal practice, actions that show remorse may mitigate a person’s situation. If the issue involves money, returning part of what was allegedly abused may signal willingness to cooperate.”

David Michael M. San Juan, a professor at De La Salle University and convener of Professionals for a Progressive Economy, said restitution could also serve the public interest by allowing the government to recover funds earlier in the process.

“Restitution is akin to an admission of guilt somehow, so it binds the prospective witness to ensuring that his or her participation is fully discussed, with full details on co-conspirators’ participation in the plunder of public funds,” he said via Facebook Messenger. “It also protects public interest by ensuring that stolen funds are returned right away rather than after a long wait.”

The Department of Justice has admitted several state witnesses in connection with the flood control investigation, including three former officials of the Department of Public Works and Highways and a private contractor. These witnesses have returned more than P316 million in cash to the government under agreements formalized with the department.

Under the Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Act, witnesses receive security, relocation assistance, legal immunity for offenses they testify about and financial and health support. In return, they must testify truthfully and comply with strict security and confidentiality rules.

“They clearly know how the crime was committed,” Mr. San Juan said. “They can help identify the masterminds.”

Both analysts cautioned that restitution and witness testimony alone would not be enough to address public concerns. Mr. Tayao said many high-profile cases in the Philippines hinge on witness accounts, but the deeper issue remains institutional.

“Our problem is systemic, not just about personalities,” he said, adding that stronger safeguards, including traceable payment systems, are needed to reduce dependence on insider testimony in corruption cases. — with Chloe Mari A. Hufana