
Albay Governor Grex Lagman Found Guilty of Grave Misconduct for Accepting Jueteng Protection Money
Apr 30
2 min read

The Ombudsman has found Albay Governor Edcel Greco Alexander “Grex” Lagman guilty of grave misconduct for allegedly accepting money from “jueteng” operators—an illegal numbers game in the Philippines.
The decision was dated January 28, 2028, but was only approved by Ombudsman Officer-in-Charge Dante Vargas on April 10. The ruling ordered Lagman’s removal from office.
However, the Ombudsman dismissed the charges of dishonesty and neglect of duty against Lagman due to a lack of sufficient evidence.
The case stemmed from a complaint filed in February 2024 by Alwin Nimo, a self-confessed coordinator for jueteng financiers or “bankers.”
According to the complaint, back in 2019—when Lagman was still Vice Governor of Albay—he allegedly sought Nimo’s help in contacting a local jueteng financier.
“Respondent asked that, in exchange for protection, he would receive his regular payola and that the complainant would act as his conduit or ‘bagman,’” the decision stated.
“The protection, as the complainant alleged, was the promise that the respondent and his colleagues in the Sangguniang Panlalawigan would ‘look the other way and refrain from using their investigative powers to inquire into the known proliferation of jueteng in Albay,’” the anti-graft court further explained.
Lagman allegedly received ₱60,000 as weekly protection money. Nimo reportedly delivered the payola directly to Lagman, and sometimes to his driver.
“This Office finds that the respondent had been animated by a corrupt motive to benefit from illegal gambling. His corrupt actions were willful and done with discernment. Corruption is present when an official uses their position to gain a benefit for themselves or someone else, contrary to the duties or rights of others,” the decision stated.
In October 2024, Lagman was suspended by the Ombudsman—a suspension that lasted until April 21.

As of this writing, Lagman has yet to issue a statement on the Ombudsman’s decision.







