𝘽𝙖𝙜𝙤𝙣𝙜 𝙋𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙥𝙞𝙣𝙖𝙨 - 𝙎𝙪𝙥𝙥𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙚𝙧𝙨

𝑻𝑹𝑨𝑵𝑺𝑷𝑨𝑹𝑬𝑵𝑪𝒀 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑨𝑪𝑪𝑶𝑼𝑵𝑻𝑨𝑩𝑰𝑳𝑰𝑻𝒀:

Concerns were raised during the Duterte administration that 𝑻𝑹𝑨𝑵𝑺𝑷𝑨𝑹𝑬𝑵𝑪𝒀 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝑨𝑪𝑪𝑶𝑼𝑵𝑻𝑨𝑩𝑰𝑳𝑰𝑻𝒀 were undermined by specific actions and policies, rather than being formally "removed" as established principles of governance. Critics argue that a pattern of behavior and specific policy decisions hindered independent scrutiny of government activities.

Key issues and events that fueled these concerns included:

Restrictions on Access to Information: Former President Duterte broke a long tradition of presidents publicly disclosing their annual Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALNs). The Ombudsman also imposed stricter rules on public access to these documents, which critics argued hindered transparency.

Attacks on Accountability Institutions: The administration was accused of harassing and intimidating officials and agencies tasked with ensuring accountability, such as the Ombudsman, the Commission on Human Rights, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. There were also efforts by pro-Duterte lawmakers to reduce the budget of the Commission on Human Rights.

Confidential Funds Controversies: The allocation and use of substantial confidential and intelligence funds (CIFs), particularly the lack of transparency surrounding their expenditure, led to significant public concern and scrutiny. These funds are exempt from standard auditing processes, making their use difficult to monitor.

Procedural Changes in Infrastructure Projects: President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. expressed shock upon learning that a safeguard designed to prevent corruption in government infrastructure projects, which required local government certification of project completion before contractor payment, was removed during the Duterte administration.

"Fire and Recycle" Policy: Critics pointed to the President's practice of reappointing officials who had previously been dismissed or accused of anomalies, which raised doubts about the administration's commitment to fighting corruption.

"War on Drugs" Impunity: The "war on drugs" resulted in widespread human rights abuses and extrajudicial killings, with the government accused of failing to conduct impartial investigations and seek prosecution of those responsible, thereby weakening accountability for human rights violations.

Disregard for Auditing Guidelines: The President publicly asked the Commission on Audit (COA) to stop flagging government agencies, which was seen as an attempt to undermine the COA's role in ensuring proper use of public funds. COA itself had flagged numerous deficiencies in the management of pandemic response funds.

These actions were seen by critics as a pattern of "selective transparency" and "inconsistent accountability" that hindered independent oversight and public scrutiny.

Source:
Source: Focus on the Global South https://share.google/pF3DFF4ihzEvo104n

Source: PCIJ.org https://share.google/xUmljqvdJ1CpEPa4x

Source: Rappler https://share.google/o12q0nBs2CaxTgfLb

Source: The Benildean https://share.google/1LrAL71PdaewsTesp

The Timing Exposes Zaldy Co

Before Zaldy Co issued his so-called “bombshell,” President Bongbong Marcos had a press con on Nov 13 where he said: before Christmas, several personalities involved in the flood-control scam would be in jail.

In the same press con, the President also revealed that around 35 members of the House of Representatives are included in the list of individuals facing charges.

(The number “37” has also circulated from various reports; the President’s publicly stated figure was “around 35.”)

That context is crucial.

Because, if you are Zaldy Co, and you know you are one of those in the list, what do you do?

You get ahead of the story. You frame yourself as the
whistleblower instead of the subject of investigation.

One day after the President conducted his press con, Zaldy Co created noise and manufactured a political crisis so that the conversation shifts away from the flood control issue that he is involved in.

What better way to weaken the credibility of the ICI than to attack the very person who created it?

Note that the ICI exists because of an Executive Order signed by the President.

So if you want to undermine that body that recommended to prosecute you and delegitimize its findings, YOU DISCREDIT ITS AUTHOR.

You don't discredit the documentary evidence and testimonies against you.

You discredit the President himself.

This strategy gives Zaldy Co two things:

1. A shield — para sa mga kaso na paparating laban sa kanya

2. A narrative — to confuse the public and redirect attention.

But timing never lies.

The President said arrests are coming before Christmas.

The President said dozens of House members are in the list.

Zaldy Co, knowing he is one of them, launched a dramatic, unverified “pasabog” just ONE DAY LATER.

We call this self-preservation, especially when accountability is near.

Credit to: Live Awake - Tea Tan Page