A FRESH plunder complaint against Executive Secretary Ralph G. Recto and former Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth) President Emmanuel R. Ledesma, JrA FRESH plunder complaint against Executive Secretary Ralph G. Recto and former Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth) President Emmanuel R. Ledesma, Jr

Fresh plunder complaint filed against Recto, Ledesma over PhilHealth fund transfer

By Erika Mae P. Sinaking

A FRESH plunder complaint against Executive Secretary Ralph G. Recto and former Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth) President Emmanuel R. Ledesma, Jr. was filed before the Office of the Ombudsman on Thursday over the alleged illegal transfer of P60 billion in reserve funds.

The complaint was filed by a coalition of Ilonggo doctors, lawyers, and health advocates seeking a preliminary investigation and the determination of possible criminal, civil, and administrative liability for plunder, technical malversation, violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, and grave misconduct. 

“The respondents deliberately, willfully, and maliciously, acting with evident bad faith, dishonesty, and grave misconduct, unlawfully and intentionally caused the transfer of P60 billion in PhilHealth reserve funds to the National Treasury,” the complainants said in their complaint-affidavit.

The filing centers on Department of Finance Circular No. 003-2024, which ordered the remittance of so-called “excess” funds of government-owned and -controlled corporations to bankroll unprogrammed appropriations under the 2024 General Appropriations Act. PhilHealth transferred P60 billion in three tranches before the Supreme Court (SC) issued a temporary restraining order stopping further transfers, leaving P29 billion unreleased, the complainants said.

In its ruling last year, the SC noted that Mr. Recto, who issued the transfer order as Finance secretary, acted in “institutional good faith” and performed a “strictly ministerial” role by following Congress’ instructions.

The Court, however, did not rule on whether he could be held personally liable for technical malversation or plunder, focusing instead on the legality of the budget provision itself.

Despite this, the complainants said that the transfer was illegal, arguing PhilHealth funds are meant solely for health services and member benefits — not for general government spending — and that the law clearly forbids moving these funds to the National Government.

In response to the new complaints, Mr. Recto maintained that he acted in accordance with the law and in good faith, citing the Supreme Court ruling.

“No criminal liability may attach to me, as former secretary of Finance, for acting in good faith and in accordance with a direct mandate from Congress in ordering the remittance of PhilHealth’s unused funds,” he said.

“The issue has already been addressed by the Supreme Court, and the government has fully complied with its ruling. Consistent with this, funding for PhilHealth has since been restored and even augmented to better serve our countrymen,” Mr. Recto said.

Mr. Ledesma did not immediately reply to a Viber message seeking comment.

“No portion of the reserve fund or income thereof shall accrue to the general fund of the National Government or to any of its agencies,” the complaint quoted from the Universal Health Care Act.

The group said the plunder charge is anchored on the alleged illegal diversion of public funds amounting to far more than the P50-million threshold under the Anti-Plunder Act, arguing that the transfer caused “substantial damage and serious prejudice” to PhilHealth and its members.

They also cited the high court ruling that declared the budget provision allowing the transfer invalid, saying Congress cannot alter the Universal Health Care law through a budget measure.

The complainants also claimed PhilHealth lost more than P50 million in potential interest income, which could have been used to expand health benefits or reduce member contributions.

“PhilHealth and its contributing members have lost so much which has a direct impact on the latter’s benefits,” the complaint said.

The complainants, who identified themselves as PhilHealth members and taxpayers, said the filing seeks accountability for the diversion of funds “earmarked exclusively for public health” and warned that allowing such transfers undermines the sustainability of the country’s universal health care system.

Market Opportunity
Gravity Logo
Gravity Price(G)
$0.004807
$0.004807$0.004807
+0.92%
USD
Gravity (G) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

X to cut off InfoFi crypto projects from accessing its API

X to cut off InfoFi crypto projects from accessing its API

X, the most widely used app for crypto projects, is changing its API access policy. InfoFi projects, which proliferated non-organic bot content, will be cut off
Share
Cryptopolitan2026/01/16 02:50
X Just Killed Kaito and InfoFi Crypto, Several Tokens Crash

X Just Killed Kaito and InfoFi Crypto, Several Tokens Crash

The post X Just Killed Kaito and InfoFi Crypto, Several Tokens Crash appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. X has revoked API access for apps that reward users for
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/01/16 03:42
Google's AP2 protocol has been released. Does encrypted AI still have a chance?

Google's AP2 protocol has been released. Does encrypted AI still have a chance?

Following the MCP and A2A protocols, the AI Agent market has seen another blockbuster arrival: the Agent Payments Protocol (AP2), developed by Google. This will clearly further enhance AI Agents' autonomous multi-tasking capabilities, but the unfortunate reality is that it has little to do with web3AI. Let's take a closer look: What problem does AP2 solve? Simply put, the MCP protocol is like a universal hook, enabling AI agents to connect to various external tools and data sources; A2A is a team collaboration communication protocol that allows multiple AI agents to cooperate with each other to complete complex tasks; AP2 completes the last piece of the puzzle - payment capability. In other words, MCP opens up connectivity, A2A promotes collaboration efficiency, and AP2 achieves value exchange. The arrival of AP2 truly injects "soul" into the autonomous collaboration and task execution of Multi-Agents. Imagine AI Agents connecting Qunar, Meituan, and Didi to complete the booking of flights, hotels, and car rentals, but then getting stuck at the point of "self-payment." What's the point of all that multitasking? So, remember this: AP2 is an extension of MCP+A2A, solving the last mile problem of AI Agent automated execution. What are the technical highlights of AP2? The core innovation of AP2 is the Mandates mechanism, which is divided into real-time authorization mode and delegated authorization mode. Real-time authorization is easy to understand. The AI Agent finds the product and shows it to you. The operation can only be performed after the user signs. Delegated authorization requires the user to set rules in advance, such as only buying the iPhone 17 when the price drops to 5,000. The AI Agent monitors the trigger conditions and executes automatically. The implementation logic is cryptographically signed using Verifiable Credentials (VCs). Users can set complex commission conditions, including price ranges, time limits, and payment method priorities, forming a tamper-proof digital contract. Once signed, the AI Agent executes according to the conditions, with VCs ensuring auditability and security at every step. Of particular note is the "A2A x402" extension, a technical component developed by Google specifically for crypto payments, developed in collaboration with Coinbase and the Ethereum Foundation. This extension enables AI Agents to seamlessly process stablecoins, ETH, and other blockchain assets, supporting native payment scenarios within the Web3 ecosystem. What kind of imagination space can AP2 bring? After analyzing the technical principles, do you think that's it? Yes, in fact, the AP2 is boring when it is disassembled alone. Its real charm lies in connecting and opening up the "MCP+A2A+AP2" technology stack, completely opening up the complete link of AI Agent's autonomous analysis+execution+payment. From now on, AI Agents can open up many application scenarios. For example, AI Agents for stock investment and financial management can help us monitor the market 24/7 and conduct independent transactions. Enterprise procurement AI Agents can automatically replenish and renew without human intervention. AP2's complementary payment capabilities will further expand the penetration of the Agent-to-Agent economy into more scenarios. Google obviously understands that after the technical framework is established, the ecological implementation must be relied upon, so it has brought in more than 60 partners to develop it, almost covering the entire payment and business ecosystem. Interestingly, it also involves major Crypto players such as Ethereum, Coinbase, MetaMask, and Sui. Combined with the current trend of currency and stock integration, the imagination space has been doubled. Is web3 AI really dead? Not entirely. Google's AP2 looks complete, but it only achieves technical compatibility with Crypto payments. It can only be regarded as an extension of the traditional authorization framework and belongs to the category of automated execution. There is a "paradigm" difference between it and the autonomous asset management pursued by pure Crypto native solutions. The Crypto-native solutions under exploration are taking the "decentralized custody + on-chain verification" route, including AI Agent autonomous asset management, AI Agent autonomous transactions (DeFAI), AI Agent digital identity and on-chain reputation system (ERC-8004...), AI Agent on-chain governance DAO framework, AI Agent NPC and digital avatars, and many other interesting and fun directions. Ultimately, once users get used to AI Agent payments in traditional fields, their acceptance of AI Agents autonomously owning digital assets will also increase. And for those scenarios that AP2 cannot reach, such as anonymous transactions, censorship-resistant payments, and decentralized asset management, there will always be a time for crypto-native solutions to show their strength? The two are more likely to be complementary rather than competitive, but to be honest, the key technological advancements behind AI Agents currently all come from web2AI, and web3AI still needs to keep up the good work!
Share
PANews2025/09/18 07:00