Senator Rodante Marcoleta and three of his co-accused have asked the Sandiganbayan Third Division to dismiss the Marcoleta plunder case involving alleged P75 million in unlawful donations received during his tenure as a party-list representative.
According to Third Division Clerk of Court Atty. Dennis Pulma, separate motions were filed by Marcoleta and co-accused Mike Defensor, Joseph Espiritu, and Aristotle Viray seeking relief from the charges.
In their motions, the accused requested permission from the anti-graft court to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence presented against them by the prosecution.
Pulma said the prosecution has been given five days to submit its comment on the motions before the court acts on the requests.
Marcoleta is facing a non-bailable plunder charge stemming from allegations that he received P75 million in donations while serving as a party-list lawmaker.
The senator previously acknowledged in media interviews that he received funds from individuals he described as friends.
Prosecutors alleged that the donations came from Defensor, Espiritu, and Viray in the amounts of P30 million, P25 million, and P20 million, respectively.
The prosecution argues that the funds constituted ill-gotten wealth that should have been properly disclosed under election and public accountability laws.
The Office of the Ombudsman filed the plunder case against Marcoleta in July 2026, alleging that he amassed at least P75 million in donations that were not declared in his election-related disclosures.
The case also includes separate allegations of violating Presidential Decree No. 46, which prohibits public officials from receiving gifts or benefits in connection with their office.
In October 2026, the Sandiganbayan Third Division ordered Marcoleta’s preventive suspension from the Senate for 90 days, citing the mandatory provisions of the Anti-Plunder Law for public officials facing valid plunder charges.
Court documents cited by multiple news organizations stated that prosecutors alleged Defensor, Espiritu, and Viray were among those who provided the donations that became the basis of the plunder complaint.
Marcoleta has maintained that the funds were campaign donations received before the official campaign period and has argued that the charges should be dismissed.
The filing of motions challenging the sufficiency of evidence is a procedural step that allows the defense to seek dismissal after the prosecution has presented its case, subject to the court’s evaluation.