IT was bewildering even to ordinary citizens the zeal and passion of Rodente Marcoleta to defend the corrupt Discaya couple, when it was asserted by certain witnesses and admitted and confirmed by the very corrupt couple that they engaged in massive plunder of state funds through overpriced and substandard infrastructure projects.
It was Rodente who insisted that the corrupt Discaya couple be admitted to the Witness Protection Program (WPP) and enjoy state protection. But he opposed any attempt to require them to return their loot, raising the stupid argument that “the law does not say so.” Rodente raised the wrong argument because, on the contrary, the law requires them to return their loot before enjoying state protection under the WPP.
Rodente’s misguided opposition extended to his stubborn refusal to allow the appointment of then Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla as the new Ombudsman. Rodente cited two main reasons. First, Remulla publicly announced the imposition of restitution as a requirement to the Witness Protection Program, which Marcoleta, in his perverse notion, believes undermines the WPP’s effectiveness. This is speculative and Marcoleta could not present any other argument that would prove his argument. He simply did not know his law.
Second, Remulla affirmed bending the law, which Marcoleta considers a violation of the code of professional responsibility and accountability. To his eternal misfortune, Rodente could not substantiate his assertion. He could not find support even among his colleagues in the opposition. He stood alone in this assertion.
Moreover, Rodente also questioned Remulla’s actions as the justice secretary, even suggesting that he might be involved in a cover-up of corrupt officials. He said that the Ombudsman’s office should be independent and impartial, and that Remulla’s appointment could compromise this independence. Again, this assertion largely belonged to the realm of speculation. He did not get support from his colleagues.
The Judicial Bar Council (JBC), the body that is constitutionally empowered to recommend to the President th top officials in the Judiciary, took Marcoleta’s opposition lightly, with one member describing it as “light.” Not much was added as the JBC members totally ignored his reasons for opposing Remulla’s appointment. BBM appointed Remulla as the new Ombudsman on Oct. 7, 2025, replacing Samuel Martires, who retired in July 2025.
The ridiculous nature of Rodente’s political situation was further heightened and strengthened when he presented a certain Sgt. Orly Gutasa, a former Philippine Marines soldier, who claimed before a public hearing of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee that he brought tons of money to the alleged homes of then Speaker Martin Romualdez and then Rep. Zaldy Co. Guteza claimed that he personally delivered a number of suitcases containing P48 million each to Romualdez and Co. He also alleged that Benguet Rep. Eric Yap delivered 46 suitcases of money to Co’s residence. These allegations were part of the probe into anomalous flood control projects.
Guteza’s claims were dismissed due to several reasons. The Manila Regional Trial Court ordered the filing of a criminal case against Guteza for allegedly forging the signature of notary public Petchie Rose Espera on his affidavit. Romualdez, Co, and Yap likewise denied his allegations, calling them “baseless.” Sen. Ping Lacson, Senate Blue Ribbon Committee chair, questioned Guteza’s credibility, citing his sudden disappearance after testifying. Lacson also stressed the need for corroborative evidence to support Guteza’s claims. Besides, Guteza’s whereabouts are currently unknown, with some reports suggesting he may be under the protection of former Marines or being held by the military’s intelligence arm.
Rodente’s master plan was a big dud, making him the object of social and political ridicule. Actually, Rodente Marcoleta is being viewed differently by various individuals in the local legal community. Retired Supreme Court Associate Justices Antonio Carpio and Adolph Azcuna have expressed somewhat critical views of him. Carpio described Marcoleta as “belonging to the lowest rung” of lawyers, while Azcuna questioned whether Marcoleta was a “legal mind,” saying he “still hasn’t reached his comet.”
These unpalatable comments were made during an interview and were seen as unflattering and wanting in propriety and intellectual humility. Rodente also faced earlier criticisms for his statements, including claims about the West Philippine Sea and former Justice Carpio’s involvement in a case against Chinese President Xi Jinping, which were fact-checked and found to be inaccurate.
In his efforts to ingratiate himself with the Dutertes, who are known running dogs of China in the Philippines, Rodente Marcoleta claimed that “there is no such thing as the West Philippine Sea,” claiming it is a creation of the Philippines. He said it doesn’t appear on local or international maps. However, these statements were debunked by fact-checkers and state officials, including Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson of the West Philippine Sea issue – Commodore Jay Tarriela, who said Rodente’s statements were a “disservice” and an “embarrassment.”
Rodente Marcoleta later clarified that he meant the West Philippine Sea was not recognized internationally and did not appear on world maps. Despite his clarification, Rodente’s initial statements sparked criticism, with some accusing him of undermining the country’s claim to the disputed waters. On the contrary, the West Philippine Sea is recognized in official Philippine documents and maps, and its name was officially adopted in 2012 through Administrative Order 29 signed by former President Benigno Aquino III.
Rodente is not taken highly, confirming his status as a local Sad Sack, an official who is prone to make habitual mistakes.
