Short answer. A complaint for estafa. Article 315 names pretending to have bribed a Government employee as one of the false pretences it punishes, and directs that the penalty be imposed in its maximum period. It also preserves a separate action for calumny against the person who made the claim.
What the law says
By pretending to have bribed any Government employee, without prejudice to the action for calumny which the offended party may deem proper to bring against the offender. In this case, the offender shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty.
Revised Penal Code, Article 315 — Swindling (Estafa). Read the full provision →
Why the Code singles this pretence out
Among the false pretences in Article 315 is fraud committed by pretending to have bribed any Government employee, without prejudice to the action for calumny which the offended party may deem proper to bring against the offender. In this case, the offender shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty. Two harms are being addressed at once. The complainant is defrauded, and a public officer is smeared by the suggestion that he was bought. That is why the article both raises the penalty to its maximum period and expressly leaves room for an action for calumny.
What has to be established
The offence lies in the pretence. The prosecution's case is that the accused claimed money was needed to buy an official's cooperation, took it, and that the claim was false. Whether any officer was ever approached is a separate question, and where money genuinely did reach a public official the situation changes entirely — different statutes come into play, and so does the position of everyone who contributed. Nothing about that can be worked out from this article alone, and it should not be guessed at in a written complaint.
Take advice about your own position first
This is the caution that belongs at the front rather than the end. A person who handed money over believing it would be used to influence an official is describing his own state of mind as well as the other party's conduct, and the account he gives will be read by others. That is not a reason to stay silent about being defrauded. It is a reason to speak to a lawyer before making any sworn statement, so that what is put on record is accurate and complete rather than shaped in a hurry.
The record that carries such a complaint
Keep everything showing what was asked for and why: the messages and voice notes making the demand, any name or office mentioned, the receipts or transfer records, and the papers that were supposedly being fixed. Note the dates against each payment. Recovering the money and pursuing the criminal complaint are separate objectives that do not always move together, and no page can tell you how a particular case will end. What it can tell you is that the representation, not the payment, is what such a case is built on.