FIRING LINE: Accountability, not political comfort

By Robert B. Roque, Jr.

Senator Ping Lacson puts it out as plainly as can be, saying the proposed Senate Blue Ribbon Committee report has been reworded, but the substance remains the same — out of accommodation for the sentiments of colleagues in the 20th Congress.

Then perhaps we can safely assume the committee believes the three senators — Francis Escudero, Joel Villanueva, and yes, the sexiest of them, Jinggoy Estrada — should be charged with plunder, malversation of public funds, and direct bribery?

I pose that as a question, as we, Filipinos, under the same premise, should apparently be more careful these days in phrasing our assumptions; just as recommendations for charges should be phrased as “subject to preliminary investigation.”

Here’s where I favor Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla in his reaction to all this last week. He was more candid, saying the revision was purely “politics” at play.

That bluntness is refreshing, because the public mood is far from political comfort and closer to outrage. Filipinos are not parsing verbs, if you’ve noticed how they’ve been reacting through chants on the streets or social media posts. 

They are fuming over the stench of systemic corruption exposed in flood-control budgets, where “insertions” quietly pad appropriations. Before this mess, we were all dumbfounded by what “insertions” even meant. But once explained as last-minute budget items slipped into the process after scrutiny at the plenary had already been publicly witnessed, it became instantly clear: insertions meant turning public works into private windfalls for a conspiracy among DPWH officials, building contractors, and legislators who had the power of the purse.

What Lacson refrained from saying is that the earlier leaked Blue Ribbon draft pointed to possible plunder, malversation, and bribery involving Escudero, Estrada, Villanueva, former senator Bong Revilla, ex-Ako Bicol Rep. Zaldy Co, and former Caloocan Rep. Mitch Cajayon-Uy.

Now he admits, without saying, that the language is gentler, the verbs safer, and the tone more collegial. Thankfully, the substance is unchanged, or so we are told.

Hopefully, these “corrected” phrasings are just words and do not signal a bending of intent. A report softened to gather signatures risks sounding like a committee negotiating with itself instead of confronting the alleged robbery of public funds.

And then there’s this “what-about Revilla” that’s equally bothersome. How come it seems he’s left standing for trial while former DPWH officials linked to the case move under the Witness Protection Program as state witnesses? To me, the optics are murky.

If this were a conspiracy, what would make the others suddenly less liable? If their testimony is crucial, fine — but the Department of Justice and the Ombudsman owe the public a clear explanation, not procedural fog.

Because if this unfolds without transparency, what assures us that those who truly engineered the ghost projects — whether a former undersecretary, a contractor, or someone still sitting in power — will be punished?

I say this with desperate hope in the Senate to do the job of making the truth unmistakable, not just acceptable for a majority signing. At this point, we should be moving along to accountability. And the picture of that should be neutral, factual, and fearless — heck, even brutal! – definitely not political comfort.

*         *         *

SHORT BURSTS. For comments or reactions, email firingline@ymail.com or tweet @Side_View via X app (formerly Twitter). Read current and past issues of this column at https://www.thephilbiznews.com