dOJ

WHY IS the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) in a hurry to recommend the filing by the Department of Justice (DOJ) of charges against certain personalities involved in several anomalous flood control projects in Bulacan and Mindoro, as well as some other infrastructure projects?

We hope we are wrong about what we are thinking. That is, that some influential political leaders or their lackeys are trying to muddle the issue so that, in the end, future charges against those concerned will not progress.

Say, what if the Justice Department becomes naïve and willingly gives in to the recommendation of the NBI? What will happen to the investigation conducted on the same issue by the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) once it can gather enough evidence to warrantthe filing of cases against the same personalities?

Will not the earlier filing recommended by the NBI adversely affect the cases that the ICI recommends to the DoJ to file against the same personalities? Will it not give a better venue for the would-be accused to invoke their right against double jeopardy?

Meanwhile, the NBI’s Southeastern Mindanao Regional Office (SEMRO) is reported to have been instructed by its main office to conduct investigations on flood control projects implemented in its jurisdiction.

NBI Director Arcelito Albao mentioned during a press meet at a local hotel that one flood control project that most likely will be the first to be probed is the one in the Lasang River in Davao City’s second district.

We would say that the NBI could not have made a better choice of subject for its probe. We can still remember that in one of the floods that inundated some low-lying areas in that part of the city, residents as well as the local authorities blamed a dike destroyed by rampaging flood waters as the reason for the immediate overflow.

Again, we are saying that the NBI could not have made a better choice to start its probe. Shortly before the last May 12 elections, we were told that contractors of big-ticket projects in the city’s second district came from as far as the northernmost part of Luzon. And it was due to political connections.

True or not does not matter anymore. But whatever will come out of the NBI investigation will either validate or dispute the claims of country-wide corruption in the implementation of such important infrastructure projects.

                                                      ************************************

This one is hardest for us to understand. And perhaps even the concerned lawyers themselves did not understand what they did.

We are referring to the action of the legal practitioners from the National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL), from the Public Interest Law Center, as well as those from the Sentro sa Tunay na Pagbabagong Agraryo (SENTRA).

The lawyers filed a Motion with the City Prosecutor’s Office of Manila to have those arrested during a riotous rally last Sept. 21, 2025, released. They argued in their motion that the alleged rioters were detained without the appropriate charges filed against them, and that the police arrested the protesters without a warrant of arrest.

Yes, as to the first reason cited by the lawyers, we have no reason to doubt the correctness of their demand for the release of the arrested protesters. But as to the second premise of the NUPL, PILC, and the SENTRA, that is where we have difficulty in understanding, and we have our doubts that the lawyers themselves did not, or refused to understand as well.

How will the arresting policemen secure warrants of arrest against the rioting protesters (kuno) when the lawmen did not have any idea who would initiate the riot, the names of the rioters, and when they were going to execute their dastardly acts?

Or, can our courts now issue warrants of arrest in “generic” terms, way ahead of the possible commission of crimes?

Just asking only.