Ombudsman’s dilemma

It’s more than five months since the flood control scandal broke, gripping the nation not only for its enormity but also for the abuse of power wielded by those in high office to steal billions from the nation’s coffers. Prominent names, many known to be politically untouchable, have been dragged into the Senate’s ensuing corruption investigation, hogging the limelight in an ignominious way.

But most of the big fish remain scot-free.

Except for former Sen. Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr., who is now detained, and former Ako Bicol party list Rep. Elizaldy “Zaldy” Co, who has since fled abroad, all the accused in the Sandiganbayan are mostly from the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).

Who are these big fish? To refresh our memory, we can turn to the affidavits and testimonies executed before the Senate blue ribbon committee by former DPWH Undersecretary Roberto Bernardo and former DPWH Bulacan 1st District engineer Henry Alcantara.

The two witnesses have named a total of eight senators who allegedly received kickbacks for their pet projects and insertions into the national budget. Alcantara mentioned three senators and two former House members, while Bernardo implicated seven senators (including two from Alcantara’s list). Of the eight senators, two finished their terms in 2025, one lost his reelection bid in 2025, and one is a sitting Cabinet member. Bernardo also implicated two secretaries (who have since resigned), two House members, one Bulacan mayor, and two undersecretaries (one died, and one resigned). (For the full story, including their denials, see “Ex-DPWH Usec Bernardo implicates new names in flood control mess,” Nation, 11/14/2025).

Alcantara and his team prepared the list of projects and their locations where the budget insertions would be downloaded. They also served as couriers, allegedly delivering kickbacks from contractors to the senators, either directly, through their staff, or, in the case of a ranking Cabinet member, through an undersecretary who was then working directly under a former senator-turned-Cabinet member. But it was Bernardo who claimed to have personally handed the kickbacks to high officials, such as resigned DPWH Secretary Manuel Bonoan and Revilla.

Both Bernardo and Alcantara implicated Bonoan, who flatly denied this allegation (see my previous column, “When denials amount to nothing,” 1/22/26).

After returning from the United States, Bonoan was finally named as a corespondent of Revilla, Co, and Sen. Jinggoy Estrada in one of the three plunder complaints pending before the Department of Justice (DOJ). Revilla, along with six others, has been separately charged with graft and malversation in connection with the P92.8-million flood control project in Pandi, Bulacan, which was filed with the Sandiganbayan (see, “It’s city jail for Revilla, 6 others in flood mess,” Headlines, 1/21/26).

Long way to go. But as regards Bonoan and the other big fish, being charged in the DOJ is just the first judicial step in their potential prosecution. Preliminary investigation by the DOJ is a long way from reaching the point where they can be officially charged in the antigraft court. Once the DOJ files the case with the Office of the Ombudsman, another process takes its own course, which can take additional time—the filing of affidavits and counter-affidavits by both parties, and the Ombudsman’s duty to weigh the veracity of the accusations vis-à-vis the evidence presented.

Nothing precludes the Ombudsman from gathering additional evidence that can bolster its case, and this can take time, too. When it finally decides to indict these big fish in the Sandigabayan, having gathered enough corroborating evidence and followed the money trail, only then can a formal trial begin.

We’re zeroing in on the testimonies of Bernardo and Alcantara at this point since they have already been admitted as state witnesses by the DOJ (although the final decision rests with the Sandiganbayan). But by and large, they are safe from prosecution, since the weight of government cases largely rests on them, having personal knowledge of the kickback scheme since 2022.

Other Senate resource persons have dragged the names of over 20 members of the House of Representatives into the kickback scheme. Still, until the DOJ or the Ombudsman accepts their testimonies as gospel truth, these allegations remain just that—allegations. They must prove that they are not the most guilty and their testimonies are material to the cases at bar.

The Ombudsman then faces a dilemma: whether to charge all eight senators and the nearly two dozen House members who have figured in the flood control scandal, or to do so selectively, depending on the evidence at hand. Doing the former belies public perception of selective justice, while doing the latter would allow the defense to poke holes in Bernardo and Alcantara’s affidavits (since the government may be accused of cherry-picking details to bolster its case only against certain individuals).

What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

—————-

lim.mike04@gmail.com