Comelec panel made no categorical finding on Marcoleta’s P75M donation — witness
Sen. Rodante Marcoleta moves to place Sen. Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa under Senate protective custody during the plenary session on Monday, May 11, 2026. Wendell Alinea, Senate Social Media Unit/FileMANILA — A Commission on Elections investigator testified on Wednesday that the poll body’s Political Finance and Affairs Department (PFAD) made no categorical finding on whether the P75 million donation received by Sen. Rodante Marcoleta was part of his personal funds or campaign donation.
Attorney III Victoria Besinio of the Comelec’s PFAD returned to the witness stand during the Fourth Division’s trial of Marcoleta and co-accused former lawmaker Mike Defensor for alleged violation of Presidential Decree No. 46, which prohibits public officials from receiving gifts by reason of their office.
Associate Justice Michael Musngi questioned Besinio if the Comelec panel found that Marcoleta received the money in his personal or official capacity.
Besinio said the panel made no such finding because it was beyond the scope of their investigation. She said investigators were not certain, which is why the Comelec filed a complaint with its Law Department for further investigation.
Musngi asked if Besinio was aware that Marcoleta was a congressman when he received the money, to which Besinio replied in the affirmative.
Besinio earlier testified before the court’s First Division that Marcoleta’s own submission of donor’s tax documents undermined his claim that the money were campaign donations since such contributions are exempt from donor’s tax.
She said documents attached to Marcoleta’s verified position paper before the Comelec included donor’s tax payments and bank deposit slips, but no deeds of donation.
She also said Marcoleta stated in the document that the donations became part of his personal funds, contradicting his earlier television interview.
Besinio said Marcoleta should have declared the funds in his Statement of Contributions and Expenditures if they were campaign contributions.
The defense previously argued that the funds were campaign donations and therefore fall under the Comelec’s jurisdiction rather than the Sandiganbayan’s.
The trial in Marcoleta’s plunder case before the Third Division is set to begin on Oct. 8.