Recto faces plunder over fund transfers

A FRESH complaint has been filed before the Office of the Ombudsman seeking to hold Executive Secretary Ralph G. Recto and other officials liable for plunder and technical malversation over the alleged diversion of about P167.23 billion in public trust funds to the National Treasury.

Public health advocate Anthony C. Leachon, through the Nabua Law Office, on Monday filed the complaint involving the transfer of P60 billion in Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth) reserves and P107.23 billion from the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corp. in 2025, when Mr. Recto was Finance secretary.

“Ignoring clear statutory text, Supreme Court doctrines on earmarked funds and expert warnings constitutes a willful indifference to law and duty, sufficient to sustain liability,” according to a copy of his complaint.

The Supreme Court earlier declared the P60-billion PhilHealth transfer unconstitutional and void in December, ordering its return to the state health insurer but without assigning personal liability.

Mr. Recto previously defended the transfers as lawful and fiscally necessary, saying the funds were idle and could be used for other government priorities.

Mr. Leachon argued the issue goes beyond legality, saying it involves criminal and administrative accountability. He said the reallocations led to service gaps in health programs, including cancer and dialysis support, and cited a reported P356.6-billion PhilHealth deficit from 2023 to 2025.

The complaint alleged violations of the Plunder law, the Revised Penal Code and the Anti-Graft law. It also sought administrative penalties, including dismissal and perpetual disqualification from public office.

He said technical malversation is committed once earmarked public funds are used for purposes not authorized by law, regardless of later restitution or absence of personal gain.

In response, Mr. Recto called the complaint “a nuisance and harassment case,” saying the fund transfers were mandated under the General Appropriations Act of 2024 and later returned to PhilHealth.

“The Supreme Court justices themselves said that I have no criminal liability because I simply followed the law and implemented it in good faith,” he said in a statement.

He denied any personal gain from the transactions and rejected allegations of wrongdoing, calling them defamatory and politically motivated. — Erika Mae P. Sinaking