Trillanes files criminal raps over ICC‑linked $2-M bribery claims

By Erika Mae P. Sinaking, Reporter

FORMER Senator Antonio F. Trillanes IV on Thursday filed cyberlibel and obstruction of justice charges as he denied allegations that he received an alleged $2-million bribe linked to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

“Let me be clear: I did not receive $2 million, nor any amount, from (former party-list rep.) Zaldy Co for the ICC personnel or for any other purpose,” Mr. Trillanes said in a statement as he lodged criminal complaints against 18 purported former marines, as well as lawyer Levito Baligod, former congressman Michael T. Defensor, and several others.

Mr. Trillanes said the charges stem from what he described as an orchestrated effort to link him to a fabricated bribery scheme involving ICC investigators, allegedly intended to malign his reputation and undermine ongoing ICC proceedings in which he is a complainant.

He specifically filed cyberlibel and “Incriminating an Innocent Person” charges, citing conflicting and defamatory statements about a supposed $2-million cash transfer and unfounded accusations of kidnapping. He accused the respondents of spreading false claims to mislead the public and intimidate witnesses connected to the ICC probe.

“Baligod and his cohorts needed to manufacture a bribery narrative to breathe life into their failing smear campaign,” he said. “The timing is no coincidence.”

Mr. Trillanes added that the 18 individuals identified as former soldiers should be held accountable for perjury over alleged false testimonies supporting the bribery narrative.

“What they did was not only an attack against me but also against the ICC investigators, aimed at casting doubt on the integrity of the ICC investigations,” Mr. Trillanes told reporters in an interview in Filipino. He warned that these allegations could be exploited by lawyer Nicholas Kaufman, counsel for former President Rodrigo R. Duterte, to undermine the tribunal’s proceedings in The Hague.

In response, Mr. Defensor said he stands firmly by the whistleblowers. “It is an honor to stand in this case with our brave and patriotic soldiers,” he said in a statement.

Mr. Defensor argued that the individuals are merely recounting the truth of what they witnessed regarding the distribution of money. “These soldiers are simply telling the truth about what they saw — the alleged distribution of money which, based on emerging reports, is linked to corruption because Zaldy Co was their ‘boss,’” he said.

“I will help bring out the truth. It is an honor for me to be part of the fight against corruption, alongside soldiers who truly love our country,” he added.

Earlier, the 18 former soldiers filed an affidavit with the Office of the Ombudsman alleging a large-scale cash delivery scheme involving high-ranking officials. Acting as “security consultants” for Mr. Co, they claimed they escorted aides carrying suitcases of cash to several lawmakers between 2023 and 2025. They also alleged they provided security for ICC investigators who were secretly operating in the Philippines during that period.

The Office of the Ombudsman clarified that the submission is currently categorized as a “transmittal of an affidavit” and is undergoing standard evaluation to determine whether there is a prima facie basis to proceed.

Mr. Trillanes said he has been coordinating with the ICC since 2017 to gather evidence and witnesses to strengthen the case against Mr. Duterte. But he contrasted his position with that of Ombudsman Jesus Crispin C. Remulla, who admitted to communicating with ICC investigators while serving as Justice secretary.

“Ombudsman Remulla may disclose whatever he has seen. But I cannot reveal the details of the meetings — who I spoke with, where, and when — because doing so would endanger the people involved,” Mr. Trillanes said.

Senate Blue Ribbon Committee Chairman Panfilo M. Lacson has noted that the panel will review the credibility of the information and the military records of the 18 personnel — some of whom the Navy claims were never members or were dishonorably discharged — before deciding whether to initiate a formal Senate inquiry.