A shocking reversal has occurred in the case involving the murder of Chinese businessman Guo Congyuan and his driver, which has shocked the Filipino-Chinese community. A suspect involved in the case claimed in his confession that the mastermind behind the incident was Guo Congyuan's 42-year-old son—Guo Xian (phonetically transcribed as Ronxian Guo, also known as Alvin Que). This claim has quickly sparked public outrage and skepticism.
According to the preliminary investigation report submitted to the Department of Justice by the Philippine Anti-Kidnapping Group (AKG) on April 19, Guo Xian was listed as one of the six suspects. Previously, he had participated in negotiations with the kidnappers as a "victim's family member."
The investigation indicated that Guo Xian had paid a ransom of 10 million pesos through a cryptocurrency account on March 31, and added another 3 million pesos on April 2. However, Guo Congyuan and his driver were ultimately killed on April 9.
Justice Minister Speaks Out: Results May Be Unexpected
Justice Minister Jesus Crispin Remulla, in an interview with the media, stated that the National Prosecution Service of the Department of Justice has initiated a preliminary investigation, expected to be completed within 25 days, and hinted that the results "may shock the society." He emphasized that the current investigation is focusing on the mastermind and the motive behind the crime, which may be related to business disputes.
Community Leader Questions: Can We Convict Based Solely on the Kidnapper's Testimony?
Prominent Filipino-Chinese community leader and founder of the Restore Security Movement, Hong Yuhua, questioned the decision to list Guo Xian as a suspect and wrote to the Anti-Kidnapping Group and the Criminal Investigation Department, listing five points of rebuttal:
The suspect is a habitual offender involved in multiple kidnapping deaths; is it too thin to charge Guo Xian based solely on his testimony?
Guo's family members Elaine and Alvin had actively sought Hong Yuhua's help in rescuing the victims; does this behavior fit the logic of someone involved in the case?
After ending the call, they immediately went to the police to report the incident.
They also actively offered a reward for capturing the real culprit; would someone involved in the case cooperate with the investigation like this?
The Guo family also sought to trace the ransom money; if truly involved, why would they actively assist in the investigation?
Hong Yuhua warned not to blindly trust the one-sided testimony of the main culprit—a Chinese fugitive named Yang, who has "dozens of lives on his hands," to avoid misleading the direction of the investigation.
Social Media Buzz: "This is So Philippines"
The incident has triggered strong reactions on social platforms. Some netizens believe that accusing the victim's family based solely on the testimony of a murderer and kidnapper, without clear investigation and sufficient evidence, is overly hasty and may even have political or economic motives. A comment read: "This is so Philippines, convict first and find evidence later."
Currently, the case is still under thorough investigation led by the Department of Justice, and the truth is yet to be further clarified. The Guo family's attorney emphasized the hope to clarify all the facts through legal means to avoid injustice.
