MANILA — Mamamayang Liberal (ML) Party-list Rep. Leila de Lima echoed House Majority Leader Sandro Marcos’ view that Zaldy Co’s video exposés give the impression of an attempt to destabilize the government.
De Lima urged the former Ako Bicol representative to bring his claims to the appropriate legal channels, saying only formal processes can properly test the corruption allegations he continues to release from abroad.
In his latest video posted Tuesday, Nov. 25, Co accused Marcos of inserting nearly ₱51 billion worth of projects into the national budgets for 2023, 2024, and 2025.
He also claimed President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. added a ₱100-billion insertion for 2025 and allegedly received a ₱25-billion kickback from it, accusations both Marcoses have denied.
Sandro Marcos dismissed Co’s disclosures, calling them “destabilization” rather than revelations. He also claimed to have intelligence reports indicating Co was working with individuals who stand to benefit from damaging the administration.
De Lima, a deputy minority leader, said the style and timing of Co’s releases raise doubts about his motives.
“When exposes are released like that, we can’t help but think there may be another agenda behind it,” she said, noting that the truthfulness or completeness of Co’s claims remains unclear.
She warned that actions perceived as destabilizing could harm the country’s already vulnerable democratic institutions.
“Anything outside the constitutional framework must be approached with caution. Our democracy is still very fragile.”
Co has been at the center of the budget insertion and flood control corruption scandal. He has been abroad for months and is currently facing an arrest warrant.
De Lima said that if Co possesses the truth, he must come home and present it formally.
“Kung talagang he has the truth… he must return, stand by it, and present it properly before the right authorities,” she said.
She added that releasing videos without sworn statements or documentation “won’t cut it,” stressing that the public still lacks clarity on “the whole truth,” who is involved, and how far the evidence may lead.