Ombudsman files plunder, graft charges vs. Jinggoy Estrada
Sen. Jinggoy Estrada is once again facing corruption allegations after the Office of the Ombudsman has formally filed plunder and graft charges against him.
According to a report by The Philippine STAR, Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano led the filing of the cases, which were rooted from Estrada's alleged involvement in the flood control corruption scandal.
The Department of Justice previously recommended filing the charges against Estrada, as well as former Department of Public Works and Highways secretary Manuel Bonoan and others, for supposedly maneuvering allocations, rigging public bidding processes, and siphoning government funds stemming from major national infrastructure budget systems.
This was after Estrada was named by former DPWH engineer Brice Hernandez as among the senators allegedly involved in kickback schemes in Bulacan. The senator has since denied the claims and filed perjury charges against Hernandez in December 2025. The DOJ junked the case due to a lack of evidence.
Speaking to reporters regarding the Ombudsman's charges, Estrada appeared unfazed by the development.
"If this is the price that I have to pay for standing on my principles and what I believe in, so be it," he said.
He said that he still has to discuss with his lawyers on his next move before denying once more Hernandez's claims that he received kickbacks from budget insertions for public works.
As an offense punishable by life imprisonment, plunder is generally non-bailable. Under the law, the court may only grant bail if it evaluates the evidence of guilt and finds it to be weak.
This is not the first time that Estrada has faced corruption allegations.
In 2014, he was detained over his alleged involvement in the multibillion-peso pork barrel scam, where he was accused of channeling Priority Development Assistance Fund allocations to bogus non-government organizations linked to businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles.
He was later granted bail in 2017 after the Sandiganbayan ruled that the evidence against him for plunder was not strong, although the case itself remained pending.