Big Fish Still Swim Free

Then Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla (now Ombudsman) during the Blue Ribbon Committee hearing on anomalous flood control projects | Photo by the Office of the Ombudsman

When President Ferdinand “BongBong” Marcos Jr. (PBBM) announced the creation of the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) in September, he promised a sweeping crackdown on corruption in public works. “No one will be spared, no special treatment,” he declared, as the commission was tasked with auditing billions in flood‑control projects.

Three months later, the scandal had exploded into the most significant corruption case in recent Philippine history. The ICI has referred lawmakers and officials for prosecution, the Office of the Ombudsman has filed its first case, and the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee has launched hearings. Yet the question remains: will these institutions act in concert to deliver accountability, or will the scandal dissolve into political theater?

The Promise vs. the Reality
Marcos Jr.’s rhetoric was bold. Flood‑control projects worth ₱545 billion were to be scrutinized, with ghost projects and kickbacks rooted out. The ICI quickly uncovered ₱92 billion in irregular contracts, recommending charges against Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Joel Villanueva, former Rep. Zaldy Co., and several DPWH officials.

The Ombudsman followed through by filing graft and malversation charges against Co with the Sandiganbayan. Arrest warrants were issued, marking the first tangible outcome of the commission’s work. Meanwhile, the Blue Ribbon Committee began its own inquiry, promising to expose systemic weaknesses in project oversight.

But the pace of justice has been uneven. Critics note delays, selective referrals, and a lack of transparency in naming implicated officials. Civil society groups warn that billions have already been lost to ghost projects, weakening flood defenses in a country where disaster resilience is a matter of survival.

Institutions in Parallel
The scandal has revealed the overlapping roles of three investigative bodies, including the ICI, a fact‑finding commission that gathers evidence and recommends cases, and the Blue Ribbon Committee. This legislative watchdog holds public hearings and issues reports, and the Ombudsman, the prosecutorial authority, has the final word on whether to file cases in court.

In theory, these bodies complement one another. In practice, their synchronization will determine whether the scandal leads to systemic reform or fizzles into partisan blame games. The Ombudsman’s independence is crucial: only it can translate referrals into prosecutions. The Blue Ribbon Committee, while lacking prosecutorial power, can shape public opinion and pressure institutions to act. The Ombudsman, however, must show that no one is above the law.

The Stakes
This scandal is not just about kickbacks. It is about the credibility of governance in a country where infrastructure is both a lifeline and a vulnerability. Flood‑control projects are meant to protect communities from typhoons and rising waters. When billions are siphoned off, the cost is measured not only in pesos but in lives.

PBBM has staked his reformist credentials on the ICI. Yet the very scale of the scandal raises uncomfortable questions: how did corruption flourish under his watch, and will his administration allow the process to reach its logical conclusion — even if it implicates allies?

What Must Happen Next
For the Philippines to move beyond scandal, three steps are essential: transparency, swift prosecution of lawmakers, and systemic reforms.

• Transparency: The ICI and Ombudsman must disclose the complete list of implicated officials and contractors. Partial revelations only fuel suspicion.
• Swift Prosecution of Lawmakers: The public demands that senators and congressmen be charged. Without this, the scandal risks losing legitimacy.
• Systemic Reform: The Blue Ribbon Committee should use its hearings not just to expose wrongdoing but to propose structural safeguards — tighter procurement rules, independent audits, and stronger disaster‑resilience planning.

The “Big Fish”
The flood‑control scandal is a test not only of Marcos Jr.’s promises but of the institutions charged with delivering accountability. The ICI has done its part by surfacing evidence. The Blue Ribbon Committee is shining a spotlight. The Ombudsman holds the gavel.

But until lawmakers — the “big fish” — face charges, the public will remain unconvinced. If these bodies act in concert, the Philippines may yet turn crisis into reform. If they falter, the scandal will join a long line of unfinished reckonings, another chapter in the country’s struggle to match rhetoric with reality.

For now, the nation waits — not for promises, but for prosecutions.