In a press conference on Monday, June 15, 2026, the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) stated it is not ruling out the possibility of negligence in the drowning deaths of student-athletes Rene Baterbonia and Divine Adili of the Ateneo de Manila University (Admu) Blue Eagles basketball team.
“You know, number one, due diligence was not exercised. Like a good father of a family, you will not subject an individual sa ganun katataas na waves. Second, there were past incidents already na nangyari. That’s the reason we will be asking why in Aurora after four activities [conducted] doon, and we will be asking also have they considered na these players are basketball players and not swimmers,” CIDG Director Maj. Gen. Robert Morico said.
It was reported that Admu Blue Eagles coach Tab Baldwin was a no-show at the fact-finding exercise conducted by the CIDG on Monday, June 15, 2026, regarding the drowning deaths of student-athletes Baterbonia, a native of Agusan del Sur, and Adili from Nigeria.
Ateneo president Fr. Roberto Yap, SJ, confirmed on June 15 the resignation of Baldwin and the team’s manager, Epok Quimpo. Additionally, the CIDG wrote to the Department of Justice requesting the issuance of an Immigration Lookout Bulletin Order against the team’s coaches who refused to heed the subpoena the agency issued.
By this time, the discussion on the drowning deaths of the two Ateneo student-athletes has already reached a heartbreaking point. The grief is immeasurable. Families mourn, teammates struggle to understand what happened and an entire university community searches for answers.
Then, a revelation shifted public attention. Coach Tab Baldwin’s estranged wife, Efi Kalogirou, who is out of the country, publicly claimed that years ago she warned Ateneo about concerns involving her husband and the environment surrounding the basketball program.
Whether those allegations were eventually substantiated is a matter for the proper authorities to act on. And it appears the CIDG has taken this lead. Fairness demands, though, that no one should be condemned solely on allegations, no matter how serious.
But fairness also demands that allegations of this nature not be brushed aside, because most of the time, public discourse is reduced to choosing between believing the accuser or defending the accused.
Yet the more fundamental question is often overlooked: What did the institution know? What did it do? And if warnings were indeed given, were they taken seriously?
Those questions are not unique to Ateneo. History is filled with institutions that, after tragedy struck, found themselves troubled by the same haunting sentence: “We tried to tell them.”
Whether in schools, churches, corporations, sports organizations, or government agencies, countless investigations have uncovered warning signs that, in hindsight, appeared obvious but were ignored because they were inconvenient, uncomfortable, or directed at individuals whose stature made them seem untouchable.
Success can become a dangerous shield. Winning coaches become icons. Outstanding executives become indispensable. Popular politicians become immune to criticism. Institutions begin to believe that protecting a person’s reputation is synonymous with protecting the institution itself.
It rarely is. In fact, the opposite is often true. Institutions preserve their credibility not by protecting personalities, but by protecting principles.
Universities, perhaps more than any other institution, carry a profound responsibility. Parents entrust them not only with their children’s education but also with their safety and well-being. That responsibility extends beyond classrooms and into dormitories, sports programs, field trips and every activity conducted under the university’s name.
Duty of care is not suspended because someone has won championships. Nor should complaints be discounted because they come from estranged spouses, disgruntled employees, or unpopular voices. Personal relationships may affect credibility, but they do not automatically negate the need for an impartial inquiry.
Every allegation deserves to be evaluated on evidence — not on the social standing of the person making it or the prominence of the person against whom it is made.
If Ateneo had indeed received concerns years ago, the public deserves to know how those concerns were handled. Were they documented? Were they investigated? Were safeguards implemented? Or were they simply dismissed?
These are not accusations. They are questions of governance. Every responsible institution should be able to answer them.
Coach Baldwin also deserves fairness. Allegations should never be mistaken for findings of fact. Public opinion cannot replace due process. Our legal system wisely insists that accusations be tested through evidence, not amplified by emotion.
Justice requires fairness for both the accuser and the accused. But fairness to individuals should never become an excuse to avoid examining institutional accountability. Sometimes organizations become so focused on defending themselves that they forget their first obligation is to seek the truth.
But the deaths of Baterbonia and Adili should never become ammunition for competing narratives. Their memory deserves something far greater — a sincere search for the truth. If warnings were given, they must be examined. If mistakes were made, they must be acknowledged. If no fault is found, that too should be established transparently.
For justice is not served by speculation, nor by silence, but by an honest accounting of the facts. That is what the families deserve. That is what every parent expects when they entrust their children to a university. And that is what every institution worthy of public trust owes the people it serves.
“A great institution is not measured by how fiercely it defends its heroes, but by how courageously it examines itself.”