Duffel Bags of Destiny: How Alleged Drug and POGO Cash Turned the VP’s Campaign into a Criminal Carry-On

Luggage Full of Lies? The Bagman’s Tale of Midnight Drops and Denials

By Louis ‘Barok‘ C. Biraogo — December 24, 2025

HAYY…., Philippine politics—where the line between tragedy and farce is thinner than a congressman’s conscience. Enter stage left: Vice President Sara Duterte, the iron lady of Davao with eyes fixed on Malacañang in 2028, heir to a dynasty that once promised to rid the streets of drugs while allegedly dipping into their profits. And stage right: Ramil Madriaga, the self-proclaimed “bagman” extraordinaire, currently cooling his heels in Camp Bagong Diwa on kidnapping charges—yes, the same fellow whose 1997 kidnapping conviction was dramatically overturned by the Supreme Court in 2003 (in People v. Patano, Madriaga, et al., G.R. No. 129306) for lack of evidence, only to find himself back in the dock in 2023 for allegedly running one of the “most dangerous” kidnap-for-ransom syndicates in recent memory.

Duterte paints herself as the persecuted paragon, a victim of “political noise” orchestrated to torpedo her presidential ambitions. Madriaga? The wronged whistleblower, armed with a notarized affidavit spilling tales of duffel bags stuffed with Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGO) and drug money delivered on her alleged orders. This isn’t a mere he-said-she-said; it’s peak Philippine political theater: jailhouse confessions versus blanket denials, where truth is the first casualty and credibility is optional. One side cries sabotage; the other, salvation through exposure (Inquirer, 22 Dec. 2025). Pass the popcorn—or better yet, the visitor logs.

**“Forensic exam scheduled for the 12th of Never—please bring your own evidence.”**

Forensic Critique: Dissecting the Dueling Narratives

Let’s sharpen the scalpel. Sara Duterte’s defense? A masterclass in deflection: “Bare allegations… nothing more than noise,” from a desperate detainee with a “criminal record” angling for freedom. She denies knowing Madriaga personally, handing him instructions, or gracing his cell with her presence. Photos together? Mere public-event snapshots in a campaign sea of selfies. And the timing? Pure coincidence that this bomb drops as her poll numbers climb.

Is this a legitimate shield against scrutiny, or a preemptive fortress built on sand? In a nation where political persecution is as common as traffic in EDSA, her “smear campaign” narrative resonates—but only if you ignore the specifics: cash from POGOs and drug lords allegedly funding her 2022 run, delivered to comedy bars and parking lots. Her absolute denial of any tie to Madriaga crumbles against claims of campaign videos showing him welcoming her in Sorsogon. Political noise? Perhaps. But noise this loud demands amplification, not dismissal.

Now, Madriaga—the “polluted source” par excellence. His notarized affidavit carries the weight of notarization (governed by the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)), admissible in any probe. Yet let’s not polish this turd: he’s a detainee facing serious charges, with a history that swings from acquitted hero (per the SC in 2003) to alleged syndicate boss. His lawyer touts three phones brimming with texts, calls, and photos proving ties to Duterte’s circle—and they’ve begged the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) for a forensic exam. Noble pursuit of truth? Or a desperate bid for leverage, perhaps state witness status to dodge his own chains? By confessing to bagman duties, he’s implicated himself in the very crimes he alleges. Quid pro quo reeks here: silence for salvation, or exposure for exoneration?

And the centerpiece of this farce—the Jail Visit Saga. Madriaga’s counsel, Atty. Raymund Palad, spins a tale worthy of a telenovela: Duterte visited twice this year—first offering to “talk to a judge” to fix his kidnapping case if he’d keep quiet; second, a midnight drive-by on October 19 where she allegedly never even left the car, a spectral Vice President haunting the parking lot like a bad horror sequel. Duterte? Utter denial: “I have never visited him in prison.”

Where, pray tell, is the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) visitor log? The CCTV footage from Camp Bagong Diwa? The security detail records? Palad claims “other sources” confirm the visits and points to potential footage—but nothing produced. If proven, this is obstruction of justice gold: witness tampering by the second-highest official. If not, Madriaga’s house of cards collapses. Yet both sides hide behind claims without evidence. A phantom midnight visitation? In the dead of night, no less? This isn’t testimony; it’s theater of the absurd, where proof is as elusive as honest politics.

Legal Minefield: Pathways to Prosecution & Precedent

Contrary to the myths peddled in coffee-shop jurisprudence, the Vice President enjoys no immunity from suit—unlike the President (as distinguished in precedents such as discussions in De Lima v. Duterte, G.R. No. 227635). Sara Duterte is fair game for investigation and prosecution while in office.

Against her: The terrain is treacherous but traversable.

Plunder (Republic Act No. 7080): Aggregate ill-gotten wealth ≥ ₱50 million via criminal acts. Madriaga alleges bags of ₱33-80 million each—exceeds the threshold if traced.

Graft (Republic Act No. 3019, Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act): Receiving gifts linked to official acts, or from entities with government business (POGOs ring a bell?).
Obstruction (Presidential Decree No. 1829): Those alleged visits to dissuade exposure.

Challenges? Corroboration. Affidavits alone won’t convict; need money trails, forensics from those phones, independent witnesses.

Against Madriaga: His confession is a suicide note—accomplice liability in plunder or related crimes, unless he flips to state witness under protection. Perjury if proven false. And that pending NBI forensic request? Case-breaker (damning texts) or case-ender (nothing there).

Precedent? Stare at the Leila de Lima saga: a high official jailed largely on testimonies from detained “polluted” witnesses—many of whom later recanted, claiming coercion. Tables turned: now a Duterte faces the playbook once wielded against critics. Sarcastic irony? The Dutertes decried De Lima’s persecution; now they cry the same tune. Recycled script, new cast—only this time, will the witnesses hold, or retract under pressure?

The Stench of Political Calculus

Strip the legal veneer, and this reeks of raw power plays. The UniTeam—that glorious 2022 “unity” marriage of convenience—has imploded into open warfare amid the Marcos-Duterte rift. Confidential funds slashed, impeachment threats, International Criminal Court (ICC) shadows over Rodrigo: this “bagman” exposé emerges precisely as Sara’s 2028 polling surges and the alliance crumbles.

Who benefits from a weakened Sara? The Marcos camp, consolidating ahead of midterms and beyond. Timing mere coincidence? Please. As her numbers rise, out comes the detainee with tales of dirty money undermining the Duterte “law and order” brand—funding from the very drug lords her father warred against. This is the opening salvo in the 2028 war: neutralize the rival early, weaponize institutions, let the mud fly.

Imperative Conclusion: A Call for Real Action

Enough theater. The Office of the Ombudsman (under Republic Act No. 6770, The Ombudsman Act of 1989) must investigate—not as a political pawn, but as the constitutional watchdog it pretends to be. Probe the affidavit, trace the funds (including potential violations of the Omnibus Election Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 881)), grant or deny that state witness bid on merit.

The NBI owes transparency: conduct that forensic exam on Madriaga’s phones publicly, no delays, no selective leaks.

The BJMP: Release the visitor logs, CCTV for those alleged dates. No redactions, no excuses—prove the visits or debunk the ghost story.

The public’s right to unvarnished truth trumps political convenience. Only forensic facts—logs, footage, digital trails—can pierce the “noise.” In a republic rotting from unchecked power, where dynasties feast while accountability starves, this scandal is symptom and warning: trust not affidavits or denials, but evidence. Demand it, or watch the absurd become permanent.