The investigation into the clearly anomalous and graft-laden flood control projects all over the country has now turned into a battle among the people involved in the probe, specifically the ones in the two Houses of Congress.
Yes, using the social media platforms, the probers themselves are in the thick of destroying each other, hoping that the loss of their credibility will work in favor of the interests of those who are getting the protection from among the investigators themselves.
Of course, there are a number among the probers whose only purpose is to ferret out the truth and have those who have committed infractions against the people and the government be accountable for their undesirable demeanor. But as always, those who are protecting the interests of those suspected of having committed corruption or graft are using all available means to destroy the credibility of those particular probers who are in favor of certain persons subject to the investigation.
Earlier, former Senate President Chiz Escudero ended up coup d’etaed for the simple perception that he was trying to prevent the probe into straying to the VP Sara Duterte impeachment issue. And look at what happened to former Senate Blue Ribbon Committee chair Sen. Rodante Marcoleta. Before his ouster as chair, he was tagged as an Escudero lackey who was out to protect the VP and ensure that the probe would only be limited to corruption issues between the years 2022 to 2025, all Marcos, Jr. administration years.
With the change in the Senate leadership, Marcoleta ended up just one of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee members. This time, he is not just perceived as a Duterte interest protector but that of the controversial contractor of the graft-laden flood control, as well as other multi-billion-peso government infrastructure projects, the Discaya couple, who unabashedly flaunted their questionable wealth.
To put strength to the alleged bias of Marcoleta for the Discayas, his fellow investigators highlighted his immediate recommendation of the couple to be considered state witnesses and be placed under the government’s witness protection program.
He wrote the Secretary of Justice for such a purpose. But since it has to be the Senate President who shall sign the letter, Marcoleta asked newly-installed SP Tito Sotto to sign the same. But Sotto refused.
Then it was Sotto’s turn to be heaped with suspicion of bias to the leadership of the House that has the most number of members named to have benefited from the corruption. The new Senate President was charged by the other members of the Senate Blue Ribbon body to be “tuta” of House Speaker Martin Romualdez when the former entered into a compromise to send Engr. Brice Hernandez to the custody of the Pasay City Police holding area.
Hernandez was issued a contempt order by the Senate probe body and was detained in the Upper House’s holding facility. Romualdez had earlier requested Sotto that Hernandez be put under the custody of the House instead of the Senate.
Back to the Senate probe, the claim that Marcoleta is protecting the Discayas, a report that the former Senate Blue Ribbon chair’s wife is a ranking officer of an insurance firm, suddenly surfaced. And the said insurance company has been cornering the issuance of bidder’s bonds to the Discayas, the premium of which amounted to hundreds of millions of pesos.
Possibly, the group of Marcoleta believes the sudden surfacing of his wife’s Discaya connection could have been the handiwork of Senator Ping Lacson, he being known as a skilled sleuth due to his experience as a ranking police officer.
Hence, it did not take long for the pro-Marcoleta group to figure out a revenge on Lacson. The other day, a photo of Senator Lacson posing intimately with the Discayas was posted on social media with the caption demanding the Senate President Pro-tempore’s explanation.
Marcoleta, too, appeared to have pressed harder his efforts to connect the corruption money trail to Speaker Romualdez by surprising the now Lacson-led Blue Ribbon probe with his presentation of a former Marine officer who claimed to have personally delivered money in millions of pesos to the houses of Romualdez and former Ako Bicol congressman Zaldy Co.
Stunned by such boldness of Marcoleta’s witness, Lacson wanted to have former Marine Sgt. Orly Guteza background-checked.
Frankly, we have no idea how the outcome of this kind of investigation by Congress will give useful inputs “in aid of legislation.”
Our take is that with the scheme the probers are resorting to, issues will further be muddled. So what can the results of a muddled probe contribute to the crafting of a more responsive legislation aimed at stopping the prevalence of corruption in government transactions?
Perhaps, the best that can be done in the present situation is to make sure that the investigation conducted by the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) will lead to the prosecution of those who are accused of corruption and their conviction by the courts.
The courts should also put a limit on the convict’s availing of legal remedies so as not to delay the full implementation of the sentence commensurate to the crime they are convicted of in relation to the brazen robbery of the people’s money.
