By CHRIS V. PANGANIBAN
TANDAG CITY, Surigao del Sur — Allegations of “ill-gotten wealth,” not just allegedly questionable contracts, are at the core of a complaint filed before the Office of the Ombudsman against Surigao del Sur 1st District Rep. Romeo “Momo” Momo Sr., according to one of the complainants, lawyer Mary Helen Zafra.
In an interview with Inquirer, Zafra said the eight complainants are urging the Ombudsman to look beyond individual projects and instead examine what she described as a pattern of wealth accumulation that she claims is inconsistent with the lawful compensation of elected officials.
(“Let’s compute it,”) Zafra said in Cebuano, arguing that salaries and allowances of public officials—such as a congressman and other local officials—would not, in her view, explain the scale of businesses and properties she alleges are linked to the family.
She was referring to the Momo family with his wife Eleonor incumbent city vice mayor of Tandag, his son Ruel, Sangguniang Panlalawigan (SP) member, Melanie Joy Momo-Guno ex-officio SP member as president of the Liga ng mga Barangay of Surigao del Sur and Romeo Momo, Jr. town councilor of Tago.
Zafra said the complaint attaches documents she claims support possible conflict-of-interest and anti-graft violations, including notarized contracts, Notices to Proceed, and corporate records from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
She specifically pointed to the Department of Public Works and Highways-funded projects she alleges were awarded to Surigao La Suerte Corp. (SLSC) and related transactions that, she said, should be examined under plunder and anti-graft frameworks.
Zafra estimated the infrastructure exposure she reviewed at more than ₱1 billion—citing about ₱1.4 billion—based on documents she said their group obtained.
She also cited what she described as a sharp growth in corporate capitalization reflected in SEC filings she claims to possess, including paid-up capital figures that allegedly rose from ₱10 million in an earlier period to ₱60 million by 2022 and to ₱200 million by 2023, alongside a reported change in corporate listings to a younger family member.
In her account, changes in names on corporate documents do not, by themselves, resolve conflict-of-interest concerns if beneficial ownership and control remain within the same family.
As part of her broader “ill-gotten wealth” theory, Zafra claimed that multiple commercial establishments and real properties in Tandag are linked to the family, mentioning businesses such as retail outlets, fuel stations, resorts and food chains.
These assertions, however, would still need independent verification through business registrations, permits, corporate records, and ownership documents, and are expected to be tested in the Ombudsman’s fact-finding process.
Zafra said her group is seeking compulsory production of records as part of the probe, including through subpoena duces tecum, to obtain documents they say are necessary for investigators to trace transactions and identify possible violations.
She acknowledged that bank records are typically shielded by bank secrecy rules, but said legal remedies may be available if investigators find sufficient basis to pursue them.
The complaint, as described by Zafra, alleges violations involving procurement-related conflict-of-interest rules, ethical standards for public officials, anti-graft laws, and constitutional restrictions against legislators having financial interests—directly or indirectly—in government contracts.
She also raised claims involving certain infrastructure projects, including flood control works, and alleged there may have been substandard performance or even “ghost projects,” calling for field inspections to validate project implementation.
Momo, for his part, has denied wrongdoing and has described the filings as politically motivated, framing them as a form of political vendetta rather than a good-faith accountability effort.
He has also asserted that there is no conflict of interest because he has already divested from the company cited in the complaint.
Zafra disputed that narrative, saying records she reviewed indicate that Momo was still listed as a corporate board director in 2019—when he was a party-list representative—and in 2022, when he was already a sitting district congressman, and that he only divested in 2023, when a grandson allegedly replaced him on the board.
Those competing claims are expected to be central to the Ombudsman’s assessment of whether any conflict-of-interest restrictions were triggered during the periods covered by the complaint.
Complaints filed before the Ombudsman typically undergo evaluation and fact-finding, during which respondents are required to answer, evidence is weighed, and investigators determine whether there is probable cause to proceed to formal charges in the appropriate forum.
As of this writing, a complete report would still require the respondent’s detailed, on-the-record reply to the specific “ill-gotten wealth” allegations and confirmation of the case’s official status and docket details from the Office of the Ombudsman.
###
