Former House Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez is facing fresh allegations after the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) reportedly found that a US$5-million donation to Cornell University was allegedly coursed through lawyer Jose Raulito Paras, a fraternity brother, according to a supplemental complaint filed before the Office of the Ombudsman. The complaint, which also includes allegations of plunder, graft, bribery, and money laundering, claims the remittance formed part of transactions investigators believe were made on Romualdez’s behalf. The allegations have yet to be proven in court, and all respondents are presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
MANILA, Philippines — Former House Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez has been implicated in a new allegation contained in a supplemental complaint filed before the Office of the Ombudsman, with investigators claiming that a US$5-million donation to Cornell University was allegedly channelled through one of his fraternity brothers, based on findings by the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC).
The allegation forms part of a broader supplemental complaint accusing Romualdez and several co-respondents of plunder, graft, bribery, and money laundering. A copy of the complaint, obtained by Politiko, outlines what investigators described as financial transactions that allegedly point to the use of intermediaries in transferring substantial sums to prestigious educational institutions in the United States.
According to the complaint, AMLC investigators traced a transfer amounting to ₱314.35 million, or roughly US$5 million, from lawyer Jose Raulito Paras to Cornell University. Investigators contend that the transaction was not made on Paras’ own behalf but was instead allegedly carried out for Romualdez.
The Ombudsman’s special panel of investigators stated that the evidence gathered by the AMLC strongly suggests that Paras acted merely as a conduit for the donation. They argued that the circumstances surrounding the remittance raise serious questions because Paras has no known educational, professional, or institutional affiliation with Cornell University that would ordinarily explain such a substantial contribution.
Paras earned his law degree from the University of Sydney, according to the complaint, making the multimillion-dollar donation to Cornell University appear inconsistent with his own personal or academic background.
Investigators further noted that Cornell University has long been closely associated with the Romualdez family. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez graduated from the Ivy League institution in 1985 with a bachelor’s degree in government. His eldest son, Tingog Party-list Representative Andrew Julian Romualdez, also studied at Cornell, where he obtained a degree in International Agriculture and Rural Development. Another son, Tacloban City Councilor Ferdinand Martin “Marty” Romualdez Jr., likewise graduated from the university with a Bachelor of Science degree in Global Development.
The complaint argues that these longstanding family ties strengthen investigators’ conclusion that the donation was more logically attributable to Romualdez rather than to Paras.
Beyond the Cornell transaction, investigators also identified another alleged remittance involving Harvard University. According to the AMLC findings cited in the supplemental complaint, Paras allegedly transferred an additional US$2 million to Harvard University, a payment investigators likewise attributed to Romualdez.
The special panel concluded that both donations appeared to be financial obligations more consistent with Romualdez’s personal interests than those of Paras.
In the complaint, investigators wrote that the remittances to Harvard University and Cornell University “appear to be more consistent with expenditures or obligations attributable to Romualdez than to Paras,” adding that it was “highly conclusive” that the lawyer made the transfers “for and on behalf of Romualdez.”
The alleged university donations now form part of the government’s wider investigation into financial transactions that prosecutors believe may be connected to the criminal complaints filed before the Office of the Ombudsman.
Romualdez has been named as one of the principal respondents in the supplemental complaint, which includes allegations of plunder, violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, bribery, and violations of the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
Also named among the respondents is lawyer Jose Raulito Paras, who investigators claim served as an intermediary in the questioned financial transactions. Former Ako Bicol Party-list Representative Zaldy Co and several other individuals have likewise been included as co-accused in the complaint.
At this stage, the allegations remain under legal proceedings and have yet to be tested in court. The filing of a complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman does not, by itself, establish criminal liability or guilt. Under Philippine law, all respondents are presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt by a competent court.
The Office of the Ombudsman is expected to evaluate the supplemental complaint, together with the documentary evidence and AMLC findings submitted by investigators, before determining whether probable cause exists to proceed with formal charges.
Should the Ombudsman find sufficient basis, the case could move forward through the country’s judicial process, where prosecutors and defence lawyers will have the opportunity to present evidence and contest the allegations.
The developments have drawn significant public attention because they involve one of the country’s most prominent political figures, alleged multimillion-dollar international financial transfers, and some of the world’s most prestigious universities. As the investigation progresses, legal observers say the focus will likely centre on whether prosecutors can establish that the questioned remittances originated from unlawful sources and whether the alleged intermediary transactions violated Philippine anti-corruption and anti-money laundering laws.
For now, the allegations remain subject to official investigation, and no final judicial determination has been made regarding the liability of any of the individuals named in the supplemental complaint.