21/09/2026
May problema ako sa ginagawa ngayon ni Alan Peter Cayetano.
Kapag ibang opisyal ang iniimbestigahan, ang tawag natin diyan accountability. Pero kapag ang spotlight lumipat na sa sariling bakuran, biglang demolition job, witch hunt, trial by publicity, persecution, selective justice.
Sandali.
Hindi ba public official ka rin?
At mismong si Alan ang nagsabi: “Wala pong problema na ako akusahan niya, public official po ako.”
Exactly.
Then act like one.
Because public officials don’t get to decide that scrutiny is legitimate only when somebody else is sitting under the microscope.
May mga seryosong alegasyon tungkol sa infrastructure projects sa Taguig. Sen. Ping Lacson has publicly raised alleged ghost projects, recycled photographs allegedly used for billing, double appropriations, and billions of pesos spent on projects connected with the Laguna Lakeshore area. These allegations are serious enough that findings have been brought to the Office of the Ombudsman, where they are being investigated.
Does that automatically make Alan Peter Cayetano guilty? No.
But neither does shouting “witch hunt!” make the evidence disappear.
And this is where the hypocrisy becomes difficult to ignore.
Cayetano now challenges Lacson: Bakit Taguig lang? Imbestigahan din ang ibang lugar.
Fine. Investigate them too.
Pero ito ang simpleng tanong:
Kung may anomalya sa ibang lugar, paano nito sinasagot ang anomalya na ibinabato sa Taguig?
It doesn’t.
That’s not a rebuttal. That’s a change of subject.
Kung may corruption sa sampung probinsya, imbestigahan ang sampu. Kung may corruption sa Davao, investigate Davao. Kung mayroon sa administrasyon, investigate the administration.
But none of those investigations should become an escape hatch from answering questions about Taguig.
Accountability is not a limited resource. Hindi kailangang pumili kung sino lang ang sisiyasatin.
And perhaps Alan should remember something every powerful politician eventually learns:
Scrutiny feels very different when you’re the one being scrutinized.
Kapag ikaw ang nagtatanong, oversight.
Kapag ikaw ang tinatanong, persecution?
Kapag ibang politiko ang may allegation, explain.
Kapag sariling political bailiwick na, demolition job?
Hindi puwedeng ganoon.
And let us be precise: these are still allegations under investigation. Evidence must be authenticated, responsibility must be established, and Cayetano deserves the opportunity to answer every allegation.
But that’s precisely why the answer should be documents, records, contracts, appropriations, accomplishment reports and evidence—not political adjectives.
Because “politically motivated” is not an accounting entry.
“Witch hunt” is not a liquidation document.
And “persecution” does not explain a questionable project.
So Alan, don’t ask the public to stop looking at Taguig.
Ask for the investigation to be fair. Demand due process. Challenge weak evidence. Present contrary evidence.
But answer the questions.
Because whether the person being investigated is Duterte, Marcos, Romualdez, Cayetano—or anyone else—the standard should remain exactly the same:
Hindi persecution ang imbestigasyon. At hindi depensa ang “persecution” sa ebidensya.
Kung walang anomalya, let the evidence clear your name.
Kung mayroon, let accountability take its course.
Ganun lang dapat kasimple.
The microscope doesn’t become unfair simply because this time, you’re underneath it.
