Major General Edgard Arevalo AFP

Another charade with an old plot and new actors
(Last of two parts)

*CROW’S NEST*
by Edgard A. Arevalo
The Manila Times
14 September 2025

THE glow from Alex Eala’s historic victory at the Women’s Tennis Association’s Guadalajara 125 Open on Sept. 6 failed to eclipse the flood control project scandal gripping her country today, as the issue of corruption has long haunted our nation.

We were ranked the second most corrupt country in Asia in 2005, according to a Political and Economic Risk Consultancy report. But globally, the Philippines is the 66th most corrupt out of 180 countries in 2024, according to

Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index.
And despite the denial and sourgraping of the Department of Finance, the decision of the South Korean government to cancel its P28.7-billion loan to the Philippines due to the “potential risk for corruption” has serious implications in terms of our national dignity and pride, if not for the projects that the loan seeks to fund.

But despite all these, the corruption of public funds will not stop because the shameless collusion among the crooks in the legislative and executive branches, in cahoots with shady government contractors, is boundless.

Even with President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s telling corrupt government officials to have some shame — “Mahiya naman kayo!” — during his State of the Nation Address on July 28, Ma. Catalina Cabral, an undersecretary at the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), demonstrated how deeply rooted corruption is in her office. Now-Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III said Cabral had called his staff to offer “inserting” a flood control project in his budget. Obviously, hindi pa rin sila nahiya (they are still shameless)!

Despite an indignant public and investigations here and there on “the most corrupt” 2025 national budget, “insertions” were discovered in the P6.7-trillion 2026 National Expenditure Program submitted to Congress. This gave legislators a reason to return next year’s proposed budget to Malacañang, insinuating that insertions happen in the executive branch, after all.

Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin took offense and admonished Congress to clean their house first and accept the blame for their own corruption. But after that “kettle calling the pot black” episode, they kissed and made up. Bersamin says he does not intend to malign the House of Representatives; Speaker Martin Romualdez says Malacañang’s statement is just a call for calm.

So, what have we gotten so far from all these congressional hearings? Nothing substantial to lock up the big names behind bars. All that we have heard and seen were finger-pointing, scapegoating, and selective denials or admissions by resource persons.

In the Senate, where contractors Curlee and Sarah Discaya testified, they read a list of names of several individuals, none of them a senator. But they identified as kickback recipients Romualdez and Ako Bicol Party-list Rep. Zaldy Co, only to later clarify that they had no personal transactions with either one. In the House, engineer Brice Hernandez of the DPWH First District Engineering Office named Sens. Joel Villanueva and Jinggoy Estrada as recipients of commissions from flood control projects.

All the “big fish” named denied the allegations. And where there is no evidence directly linking them to the scandal, there is no way will they be indicted or convicted.

It’s going to be like a déjà vu of the controversy over the pork barrel scam of Janet Lim Napoles. She is now serving multiple prison terms after she was convicted of money laundering and corruption of public officials. Meanwhile, the lawmakers, who were charged with conspiring with her to commit plunder by downloading their multimillion-peso Priority Development Assistance Funds — and receiving kickbacks and commissions therefrom — to the bogus nongovernment organizations she owns, were acquitted on account of “reasonable doubt.”

This cycle of impunity is bound to be repeated unless we manifest — this time, in the strongest terms and manner possible — our abhorrence and indignation over the shamelessly corrupt practices of government officials, whether elected or appointed to public office! This crime against us will victimize our children’s children unless we end it today.

We all should speak out! Being quiet is not passivity. It is not just acquiescence; it is complicity. It’s aiding and consenting to the culture of corruption.

Go out on the streets, not as an angry mob, but as a people made wretched by the large-scale theft of their taxes — hard-earned money that the government should have spent to alleviate their suffering from flood, hunger, maleducation and costly hospital bills.

Make the government feel that we are fed up with the corruption plaguing our nation, and that we are determined to exact accountability from those we have trusted. And those who are unfit, those who fail the steep expectations required of public officers, must be removed and punished.

We should act resolutely to put an end to the culture of indifference and resignation to the fate that we are helpless in the face of this emergent practice that has become systemic and endemic. We should stop the robbery of P118.5 billion annually from 2023 to 2025 due to corruption in flood control projects alone, per Department of Finance estimates. And while unscrupulous politicians squander public funds to support their and their families’ lavish lifestyles, the government has resorted to loans that have reached P17.27 trillion as of June.

While the next national election is still three years away, let us prepare for it; weaponize it against the corrupt, the incompetent and the political dynasties who do not deserve public office. We should emulate the young generation of Filipinos who have shown that they are capable of rejecting the lure of money, the antics of traditional politicians and the capers of entertainers. But as early as now, let us demand the abolition of funds forcibly taken from our salaries that rotten politicians dangle to the poor as “ayuda” to buy loyalty and secure their votes. Just for 2025, a total of P103.29 billion were set aside for the “Tulong Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged/Displaced Workers” (P18.29 billion), “Ayuda para sa Kapos ang Kita Program” (P26 billion), Medical Assistance to Indigent and Financially Incapacitated Patients program (P14.25 billion), and Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (P44.75 billion).

People in government, they better listen. Filipinos are just sick and tired of corruption, fueled and fired up by years of suffering in silence. And just as the web of fraud and ostentatious display of wealth of crooks in government has reached unimaginable levels of callousness and insensitivity, they may just be inspired by the examples set by Indonesia and Nepal.

Let us keep the pressure strong and without letup until this charade, with an old plot and new actors, will have a happy ending for us Filipinos.

[email protected]
X:

Another charade with an old plot and new actors Last of two parts

Another charade with an old plot and new actors
(Last of two parts)

CROW’S NEST
by Edgard A. Arevalo
The Manila Times
14 September 2025

THE glow from Alex Eala’s historic victory at the Women’s Tennis Association’s Guadalajara 125 Open on Sept. 6 failed to eclipse the flood control project scandal gripping her country today, as the issue of corruption has long haunted our nation.

We were ranked the second most corrupt country in Asia in 2005, according to a Political and Economic Risk Consultancy report. But globally, the Philippines is the 66th most corrupt out of 180 countries in 2024, according to

Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index.
And despite the denial and sourgraping of the Department of Finance, the decision of the South Korean government to cancel its P28.7-billion loan to the Philippines due to the “potential risk for corruption” has serious implications in terms of our national dignity and pride, if not for the projects that the loan seeks to fund.

But despite all these, the corruption of public funds will not stop because the shameless collusion among the crooks in the legislative and executive branches, in cahoots with shady government contractors, is boundless.

Even with President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s telling corrupt government officials to have some shame — “Mahiya naman kayo!” — during his State of the Nation Address on July 28, Ma. Catalina Cabral, an undersecretary at the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), demonstrated how deeply rooted corruption is in her office. Now-Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III said Cabral had called his staff to offer “inserting” a flood control project in his budget. Obviously, hindi pa rin sila nahiya (they are still shameless)!

Despite an indignant public and investigations here and there on “the most corrupt” 2025 national budget, “insertions” were discovered in the P6.7-trillion 2026 National Expenditure Program submitted to Congress. This gave legislators a reason to return next year’s proposed budget to Malacañang, insinuating that insertions happen in the executive branch, after all.

Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin took offense and admonished Congress to clean their house first and accept the blame for their own corruption. But after that “kettle calling the pot black” episode, they kissed and made up. Bersamin says he does not intend to malign the House of Representatives; Speaker Martin Romualdez says Malacañang’s statement is just a call for calm.

So, what have we gotten so far from all these congressional hearings? Nothing substantial to lock up the big names behind bars. All that we have heard and seen were finger-pointing, scapegoating, and selective denials or admissions by resource persons.

In the Senate, where contractors Curlee and Sarah Discaya testified, they read a list of names of several individuals, none of them a senator. But they identified as kickback recipients Romualdez and Ako Bicol Party-list Rep. Zaldy Co, only to later clarify that they had no personal transactions with either one. In the House, engineer Brice Hernandez of the DPWH First District Engineering Office named Sens. Joel Villanueva and Jinggoy Estrada as recipients of commissions from flood control projects.

All the “big fish” named denied the allegations. And where there is no evidence directly linking them to the scandal, there is no way will they be indicted or convicted.

It’s going to be like a déjà vu of the controversy over the pork barrel scam of Janet Lim Napoles. She is now serving multiple prison terms after she was convicted of money laundering and corruption of public officials. Meanwhile, the lawmakers, who were charged with conspiring with her to commit plunder by downloading their multimillion-peso Priority Development Assistance Funds — and receiving kickbacks and commissions therefrom — to the bogus nongovernment organizations she owns, were acquitted on account of “reasonable doubt.”

This cycle of impunity is bound to be repeated unless we manifest — this time, in the strongest terms and manner possible — our abhorrence and indignation over the shamelessly corrupt practices of government officials, whether elected or appointed to public office! This crime against us will victimize our children’s children unless we end it today.

We all should speak out! Being quiet is not passivity. It is not just acquiescence; it is complicity. It’s aiding and consenting to the culture of corruption.

Go out on the streets, not as an angry mob, but as a people made wretched by the large-scale theft of their taxes — hard-earned money that the government should have spent to alleviate their suffering from flood, hunger, maleducation and costly hospital bills.

Make the government feel that we are fed up with the corruption plaguing our nation, and that we are determined to exact accountability from those we have trusted. And those who are unfit, those who fail the steep expectations required of public officers, must be removed and punished.

We should act resolutely to put an end to the culture of indifference and resignation to the fate that we are helpless in the face of this emergent practice that has become systemic and endemic. We should stop the robbery of P118.5 billion annually from 2023 to 2025 due to corruption in flood control projects alone, per Department of Finance estimates. And while unscrupulous politicians squander public funds to support their and their families’ lavish lifestyles, the government has resorted to loans that have reached P17.27 trillion as of June.

While the next national election is still three years away, let us prepare for it; weaponize it against the corrupt, the incompetent and the political dynasties who do not deserve public office. We should emulate the young generation of Filipinos who have shown that they are capable of rejecting the lure of money, the antics of traditional politicians and the capers of entertainers. But as early as now, let us demand the abolition of funds forcibly taken from our salaries that rotten politicians dangle to the poor as “ayuda” to buy loyalty and secure their votes. Just for 2025, a total of P103.29 billion were set aside for the “Tulong Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged/Displaced Workers” (P18.29 billion), “Ayuda para sa Kapos ang Kita Program” (P26 billion), Medical Assistance to Indigent and Financially Incapacitated Patients program (P14.25 billion), and Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (P44.75 billion).

People in government, they better listen. Filipinos are just sick and tired of corruption, fueled and fired up by years of suffering in silence. And just as the web of fraud and ostentatious display of wealth of crooks in government has reached unimaginable levels of callousness and insensitivity, they may just be inspired by the examples set by Indonesia and Nepal.

Let us keep the pressure strong and without letup until this charade, with an old plot and new actors, will have a happy ending for us Filipinos.

[email protected]
X:

Another charade with an old plot and new actors Last of two parts

Another charade with old plot and new actors
(First of two parts)

CROW’S NEST
By Edgard A. Arevalo

THE public indignation over “ghost” and substandard flood control projects, the investigations and congressional hearings in aid of legislation to forestall future corruption, and efforts to identify and punish the crooks in government are sadly an exercise in futility. As it has been in the past, we can expect nothing substantial to come out of this charade that has an old plot with a different set of characters.

By “substantial” result, we mean the “big fish” going to and languishing in jail, not just administratively dismissed or expelled. Administrative dismissal in the case of government officials is way too common and an easy way out. Expulsion from Congress, while it may even be harder to accomplish because of a tedious legal procedure and the collegial ties that bind, is never enough.

By “big fish,” we mean high-ranking government officials. They are the past and current members of the Cabinet and their underlings whose departments are under scrutiny for patent and revolting anomalies committed by nonfeasance, malfeasance or misfeasance. Among these is the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), where “ghost,” unfinished and completed but substandard projects were recorded.

By big fish, we also mean high-level elected officials. They are the past and current legislators whose names are now hogging headlines for budget insertions or knowingly receiving illegal campaign contributions worth millions of pesos from contractors with existing government contracts.

In our judicial system, where due process is inviolable, the wheels of justice grind slowly to prevent injustice. Government officials in an administrative case may be dismissed from public service with the guilt established by mere substantial evidence; or, in a civil suit, pay damages to the government by the sheer preponderance of evidence. But in criminal cases, like those involving plunder, bribery and related felonies constituting graft, the quantum of evidence required to secure a conviction is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

In our country, those wheels of justice grind just fine, but they grind excruciatingly slow. Meanwhile, in the intervening period — from indictment in court to rendering of judgment — the people could have forgotten or choose to forget; witnesses lose their interest (read: paid or harassed into withdrawing or recanting their testimonies) and vanish; and the moneyed accused can pay the best lawyers to defend them.

Too bad, the “big fish” gets off the hook, lies low or disappears from the public eye momentarily. Worse, he resurrects his political career at the opportune time. Worst, he gets reelected to high office again, speaking and behaving like the living incarnate of integrity and righteousness during live television broadcasts of committee hearings. End of story.

What happens now to the two Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) district engineers who earn an average of P54,000 a month but can afford to lose P300 million or more in a casino, as Sen. Panfilo Lacson said? What about the few spoiled brats of public officials and contractors who flaunt their wealth on social media while fellow Filipinos wallow in poverty? What happens to Curlee and Sarah Discaya, government contractors for nine years, who made it big after getting projects from the DPWH? They will all be persecuted and bashed on social media for as long as the issue dominates the headlines.

But soon, average Filipino wage earners who brave the storms and wade through flooded streets to feed their families and pay taxes to the government will forget and just move on.

And the government is opiating the masses. But we should doubt if this sudden awakening and newfound impulse to call out the crooks in government will go far and high in the totem pole where accountability resides. Or this is, as most of us suspect, all for show to mask other failures in governance.

Investigations devoid of credibility

Manuel Bonoan, head of the very agency at the center of the controversy when it blew up, was unable to stand the heat of being criticized for clinging to his post and investigating his own department. But he had the privilege of resigning instead of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. firing him for incompetent leadership and management.

Both chambers of Congress each have a committee investigating the anomaly despite being also mudded in the controversy. They vowed to summon anyone to the hearing in aid of legislation or to indict anyone — even fellow legislators — found to have committed a felony. We wonder how they would proceed without asking any of their own to testify under oath on their alleged involvement in the anomalous flood control projects.

In the House of Representatives, Navotas Rep. Toby Tiangco said Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Zaldy Co, former chairman of the House appropriations committee, had inserted P13.8 billion for flood control projects in the bicameral conference. Tiangco raises questions about the credibility of the House Committee on Infrastructure, or Infracom, to investigate the flood control anomaly if the body declines to summon Co as a resource person to testify under oath and clarify the allocations. Co claims he has resigned as chief executive officer of Sunwest, one of the 15 contractors President Marcos named as having cornered the highest number of DPWH projects in the country.

The credibility of the Senate to investigate is also at issue, as sitting senators were accused of receiving multimillion-peso contributions to their respective election campaigns, not to mention those who lost but also received such illegal donations. There are also senators whose families have partnerships with the contractors being investigated. And there are senators who, allegedly, as former Cabinet members, used their power and influence for both family business and political gains.

Would we be naïve to believe that they would send any of their fellows to the gallows? To say no will be belaboring the obvious.

It is already telling how Infracom members voted to defer summoning Baguio City Mayor Benjamin Magalong. They opted to prioritize contractors who would not squeal over Magalong, who is “ready to make a presentation” and “name names” (of the lawmakers) involved in the scandal. This, despite Infracom chairman and Bicol Saro party-list Rep. Terry Ridon taking offense at Magalong’s comment, calling the hearing a “moro-moro.” Even more surprising is that Infracom member and Manila Rep. Benny Abante voted against inviting Magalong, given the former’s propensity to summon immediately — under pain of contempt — anyone offending the dreaded Quad committee, of which he was a member.

Guess why the hesitation.

[email protected]
X:

Another charade with an old plot and new actors First of two parts

Convergence of experiences and competencies in our respective fields, we are pleased—and honored—to be part of this journey of the Philippine Air Force (PAF).

Thank You, LTGEN Arthur M Cordura, PAF Commanding General for making Mr. Chino Gaston (GMA7), Ms. Pia Hontiveros (CNN Phils), fUSec Emerald Ridao, and me (SMC) a part of this meaningful endeavor.




https://www.facebook.com/share/p/16uac4AncT/?mibextid=wwXIfr

*Rule of Law*
By Edgard A. Arevalo
*CROW’S NEST*
The Manila Times
03 August 2025

WHEN the issue of the constitutionality of the four articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte was raised before the Supreme Court (SC), both the petitioners and respondents submit to the SC’s judicial power. It was a deference to its constitutional obligation “to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government.” (Section 1, Article VIII of the 1987 Philippine Constitution).

On July 25, 2025, the SC en banc, voting 13-0 with no abstention or dissent, declared that the three articles of impeachment filed in December 2024 “remained unacted upon and archived by the 19th Congress” and are deemed “effectively dismissed,” and the fourth impeachment article filed in February 2025 is unconstitutional and violates the one-year bar rule under the 1987 Constitution, and is deemed “null and void ab initio.” The Senate “did not acquire jurisdiction” and, therefore, has no basis to constitute itself as an impeachment court.

The SC also declared that “an impeachment process is primarily a legal and constitutional procedure but with political characteristics x x x.” It must be “framed in the Rule of Just Law,” where “due process x x x and the right to speedy disposition of cases” must be observed.

*Contending views*

Respondents, civil society and various other interest groups vigorously assailed the unanimous ruling of the Court. Advocates of the impeachment case label the decision a “judicial overreach.” Critics called the judgment an “ex parte” (in favor of the vice president) and “grossly unfair” decision that “might be in violation of the Constitution.”

Acclaimed legal experts and practitioners say that decision was based on the wrong appreciation of factual events. They claim that SC justices failed to consider that there was a votation on the fourth impeachment complaint before the three earlier ones were archived.

But proponents of the same decision declare that it upholds the rule of law. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines, for one, affirms the SC’s role as the “sole interpreter of the law and the final arbiter of constitutional questions, including the limits of impeachment cases.”

Proponents of the SC decision argue that while the House of Representatives may set its own rules governing impeachment cases, House Secretary General Reynaldo Velasco cannot deliberately withhold action or referral to the House speaker until Feb. 5, 2025 — the last day of session of Congress — of the three impeachment complaints filed in December 2024. This is because Article XI, Section 3(2) of the Constitution provides that the verified complaint for impeachment should be included in the order of business within 10 session days from receipt and immediately referred to the House Committee on Justice within three session days.

This was deliberately not complied with — an abuse of discretion on the part of the House that falls within the ambit of the Court’s judicial power of review.

Those who oppose the SC ruling claim that the high court has effectively established requirements that are not written in the Constitution when it required the House to provide its members with a draft of the complaint with “clear and convincing evidence that constitutes proof of the acts and omissions that are considered as impeachable offenses” to enable them to have an informed decision when they affix their signatures endorsing the complaint.

The SC likewise requires that the public officer who is the subject of the impeachment case must be provided with a draft of the complaint, with evidence attached, for him or her to be given an opportunity to answer and his or her side to be heard.
In any case, the mere verification and signature of House members in the impeachment complaint do not constitute due process of law, the SC said.

*How should a disinterested citizen view these developments?*

The SC’s decision upholds the principle of checks and balances among the three co-equal branches of government. The Legislative branch enacts the laws that the Executive branch implements. Questions of law and interpretations thereof, as well as the legality and constitutionality of the actions of government and the laws passed by Congress, are vested solely in the Judicial branch — ultimately in the SC.

The Court did not exercise “judicial overreach.” It exercised its power of judicial review and perform its constitutional mandate to determine whether the House, as a branch of government, committed abuse of discretion in waiting for the fourth impeachment complaint while deliberately “sitting” on the first three.

But we should guard against the Senate in a hurry to junk the impeachment case following the SC ruling that it did not acquire jurisdiction; that the articles of impeachment are unconstitutional and, therefore, null and void from the start. The matter is subject to a motion for reconsideration that the House is entitled to avail itself of as a legal remedy. Only after the SC has ruled with finality should the Senate desist from proceeding to hear the impeachment case.

The SC did not absolve the impeached vice president from any accountability. In ruling that the fourth impeachment article violated the one-year bar rule, the same complaint can be refiled on Feb. 6, 2026, following any of the two modes of impeachment under the Constitution.

While the decision may not sit well with everybody, given the politically charged nature of an impeachment case, people should look at the decision with faith in the integrity of the judiciary.

From the very words of the ponencia: “[T]his Court, regardless of the political result, will not evade its duty to declare when an act is done with grave abuse of discretion amounting to an excess of jurisdiction of any department, organ, or office.”

Amid this development in our political landscape, and whatever happens to the impeachment case, we, the people, should demand accountability from among public officers. And we can do that not only through sui generis proceedings of impeachment or by filing complaints before the Ombudsman or the regular courts. We can also use the power of our votes to prevent incompetent and corrupt officials from occupying public office.

[email protected]
X:

Rule of law WHEN the issue of the constitutionality of the four articles of impeachment against Vice President Sara Duterte was raised before the Supreme Court (SC), both the petitioners and respondents submit to the SC’s judicial power. It was a deference to its constitutional obligation “to settle actual ...