THE SCALE and depth of corruption in flood control projects has fueled public demand for swift punishment. Two demands have been raised: Send the crooks to jail! Return stolen funds!
But precisely because of the enormity and systemic nature of the problem, there is no, and never will be, a fastbreak route to justice.
The challenge is two-fold.
First, corruption spans the entire budget cycle. It implicates a wide network of individuals: legislators, Department of Budget and Management and Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) officials, contractors, regulators, revenue officers, and even auditors.
Second, the amounts involved are staggering, spread across tens of thousands of projects nationwide, and across multiple years and administrations. This is not a case of a single ghost project or a lone bagman caught red-handed; it is a systemic, entrenched pattern of abuse, misuse, and waste of state resources and taxpayers’ money.
To dismantle this system, investigators must proceed methodically. That means gathering documentary evidence at every point in the chain: documentation of the congressional insertions during appropriation, budget documents, procurement records, contract approvals, fund releases, inspection reports, and payment vouchers. Each document must identify not just what was done, but who signed off at each step, tracing accountability up the line of command.
There is also the matter of on-the-ground verification, requiring field inspections. All these require a working system for documentation, securing affidavits, and good custody of evidence, for investigation and eventual prosecution where warranted.
Because of these complexities, this investigation cannot rely on anecdotes or build on public outrage alone. It must meet the evidentiary standards required in court.
MYRIAD CHARGES, OFFENSES
Depending on the facts and available testimonial and documentary evidence, the charges could range from procurement violations and anti-graft offenses, to malversation, technical malversation, falsification, direct bribery, or even plunder.
Each offense has distinct legal elements, and without the proper and complete paper trail, even a strong suspicion will likely collapse under judicial scrutiny, a familiar refrain from past corruption scandals.
This is why investigators must resist shortcuts and premature conclusions. A hasty and sloppy case build-up work could risk acquittals and embolden the corrupt, thereby undermining public trust.
The better path is deliberate and strategic: establishing clearly how the corrupt system operates, prioritizing the most egregious cases for case build-up, building airtight evidence, and moving systematically against the networks at the center of the scheme.
As frustrating as it may be, patience is essential. A fastbreak route may look dramatic, but in this high-stakes game of corruption among pushers, enablers, and players, only a careful, well-executed play will have a better chance of delivering accountability.
WANTED: EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE
Investigating the present flood control and public works scandals will require meticulous evidence gathering. For any prosecution to succeed, investigators must establish a clear trail of decisions, transactions, and actions taken by responsible officials and private actors.
The evidentiary requirements will vary depending on the charges to be filed. For example:
- Malversation of Public Funds (Art. 217, RPC): Misappropriating public funds or property by an accountable officer.
- Technical Malversation (Art. 220, RPC): Applying funds to purposes different from those for which they were appropriated.
- Plunder (R.A. 7080): Where ill-gotten wealth amassed through a series of overt acts totals at least PhP50 million.
- Other potential offenses may include violations of procurement laws, anti-graft laws (R.A. 3019), falsification, direct bribery, and conspiracy, among others.
Regardless of the specific crime, certain core pieces of evidence will be indispensable:
- Official certifications and documents from every stage of the project:
- Planning and approval
- Bidding and award
- Contract implementation and acceptance
- Fund releases and payments
- Signatures and accountability trail clearly identifying officials and private individuals who authorized, approved, or benefited at each step
- On-ground verification to establish whether projects were: completed, partially done, substandard, ghost or non-existent; and comply with specifications
- Financial and ownership records, including beneficial ownership disclosures, to expose conflicts of interest and hidden relationships.
Given the scale of corruption alleged, investigative agencies must prioritize efforts strategically. Possible considerations for prioritization may include:
- Contractors holding an unusually high number of projects beyond their technical or financial capacity;
- Projects located far from the contractor’s principal place of business;
- Clusters of companies tied to the same beneficial owners;
- Politician-owned or controlled firms bidding on government projects; and
- Irregular or sudden disbursements from unprogrammed funds.
Technology-driven analytics could be employed to sift through thousands of transactions and flag the most suspicious patterns.
WHAT CITIZENS EXPECT
Citizens have watched scandal after scandal unfold, each promising to be the last, only to see the cycle repeat. We need more than symbolic hearings or fixes.
At this moment, there are two intertwined objectives that we expect the investigations to deliver:
First, understanding the system. To dismantle entrenched corruption, we must fully understand how each stage of the budget cycle was breached, which institutional safeguards failed, and how the different players colluded. This understanding will provide the evidentiary and analytical foundation for eventual reforms, ensuring that future changes are not just cosmetic but actually responsive to the vulnerabilities being exploited.
Second, investigations must lead to successful prosecution. Even as the systemic picture is being mapped out, there must be focused investigations aimed at building prosecutable cases. The ultimate measure of accountability is not just public exposure but criminal and administrative prosecution, leading to convictions and sanctions. Without this, impunity goes unpunished and future schemes will simply adapt and re-emerge.
Several oversight processes are now underway. Citizens expect these mechanisms to work in complement, each covering the gaps and limitations of the others, so that no part of the corruption network escapes scrutiny.
The Blue Ribbon Committee hearings are the most visible of the ongoing investigations. Streamed live and widely reported, they allow citizens to directly observe testimony and assess the demeanor of key officials and witnesses. Senators are also able to question resource persons and witnesses from multiple angles, surfacing different narratives and contradictions. Documents and admissions revealed at the hearings become part of the public record, building a shared factual baseline. But it has its limitations. It is vulnerable to grandstanding and partisan narratives.
TRANSPARENCY AS THE DEFAULT
The Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) represents the executive branch’s most serious step to date in addressing the scandal. As a fact-finding body, it is mandated to focus narrowly on infrastructure and flood-control projects, so that it can dive deep into technical and documentary evidence. It carries the weight of presidential backing, which can help compel cooperation from executive agencies. But its power is temporary and informal. Its credibility will depend on how rigorously it documents facts and how transparent it is in reporting to the public.
The role of the Commission on Audit (COA) is pivotal. With audit offices spread nationwide, it has both the reach and the technical capacity to trace complex financial transactions and verify whether projects were implemented as claimed. But its credibility is under severe strain. The alleged setting aside of portions of project funds for COA personnel is a direct subversion of its mandate. Even more alarming are allegations that a sitting COA Commissioner solicited projects, suggesting corruption at the very top of the institution. COA also cannot escape the fact that it failed to prevent or detect the distortions now coming to light.
COA must publicly respond to these allegations to restore public trust and for its audit work to be credible.
Finally, the Ombudsman’s role will be the most critical. It has the constitutional power to investigate and prosecute criminal and administrative cases involving public officials, especially those under the Sandiganbayan’s jurisdiction. Its role will be decisive in transforming findings from other bodies into actual convictions.
The upcoming appointment of a new Ombudsman is therefore a watershed moment. A strong, independent Ombudsman can ensure that investigations lead to prosecutions, while a weak or compromised one risks burying the entire scandal.
Citizens expect deliberate but timely progress. Transparency must be the default. Closed-door investigations only breed suspicion and rumor. Key documents and findings should be publicly released, so citizens can track developments and independently judge whether actions are genuine.
Clear milestones and timelines must be communicated and met. Endless inquiries without visible outcomes will only fuel cynicism and erode trust.
Nonetheless, we have faith that not all are corrupt. Even amid widespread corruption, many public servants remain honest and dedicated. There are DPWH engineers, COA auditors, and even legislators who have resisted participation in corrupt schemes. Their voices and actions are critical now, and we encourage them to step forward and protect the integrity of their institutions, using their positions to expose and stop corruption, rather than enable it.
THE PEOPLE PAY THE PRICE
Corruption is not a victimless crime. In the end, it is the Filipino people who bear the cost of corruption. The schemes of collusion, congressional insertions, rigged bidding, and compromised oversight take concrete form in every ghost project, substandard project, overpriced project, and misaligned or pointless project.
The most painful part is that these failures are not mere accidents or bureaucratic lapses. They are the direct outcomes of a system deliberately hijacked by those entrusted to safeguard it.
What makes this betrayal even more revolting is the shameless display of wealth by those implicated in the schemes. Even as communities drown in floodwaters and scramble for relief, the architects of corruption flaunt luxury cars, sprawling mansions, foreign travel, and lavish lifestyles.
This ostentation is more than offensive. It is a declaration that they believe themselves untouchable, above the law, and beyond accountability. It rubs salt into the deep wounds of communities left to suffer the consequences of their theft and plunder.
The current investigations create a rare opportunity for reckoning. The scale of the scandal has forced systemic corruption into the open, revealing how deeply it has penetrated the budget process and public works. The raiders of the public treasury must be exposed and held accountable.
Again, a fastbreak will not work. We need a relentless, methodical pursuit of truth and justice. We need to stay with the story, not just until the headlines fade, but until the full truth is told and those responsible are held to account. — Right to Know Right Now Coalition, 30 September 2025
Download the report here: Ikulong korap! Ibalik ang nakaw! No fastbreak to justice vs crooks