18/09/2025
๐ญ๐๐๐๐
๐ช๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ช๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ช๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ต๐๐๐: ๐ป๐๐ ๐บ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ท๐๐๐๐ ๐น๐๐๐
๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐ซ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐
๐ซ๐ท๐พ๐ฏ ๐ญ๐๐๐๐
๐ช๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ท๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ญ๐๐๐
๐โ ๐จ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐บ๐๐๐๐
๐๐๐
๐พ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐: ๐ฌ๐๐๐ ๐ณ๐๐๐๐๐
๐ฌ๐
๐๐๐๐
๐๐: ๐ด๐๐๐๐ ๐ฑ๐๐๐๐ ๐บ๐๐๐๐
๐ท๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ด๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐: ๐ด๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ซ๐๐๐๐๐
The infamous corruption scandal involving the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), the Discaya couple, and several politicians and contractors came rushing like a flash flood throughout media outlets and social media platforms recently. This became more alarming with the most recent news of the owners of numerous construction firms, Pacifico and Sarah Discaya naming a wide range of local government officials involved in the alleged anomalies in flood control projects.
It is evident as to how the allocations for infrastructures meant to secure the general public from disasters like floods, typhoons, and heavy rains are anomalously spent: the questionable lavish lifestyle and luxurious possessions (e.g. cars, luxury items, private properties) shamelessly showed off by the Discayas, congress, and representatives (Ombay, 2025), DPWH and government officials (Servallos & Galvez, 2025), and their progeny, commonly coined as โnepo-babiesโ that are bashed and lifestyle-checked across social media platformsโalso considered by the media as a form of activism (De Leon, 2025).
On September 8, during a televised Senate Blue Ribbon Committee hearing, 17 House of Representatives members and a number of officials from the DPWH demanded 25% kickbacks of project costs, conditionally for the award of flood control contracts (Gomez, 2025). โMock biddingโ was also one of the issues raised, along with โghost projects,โ and inflated or advanced kickbacks. The ghost projects, in particular, were used to describe those that are either non-existent or marked as โaccomplishedโ with no actual progress (Senate of the Philippinesโ Press Release, 2025). Particular contractors among the firms owned by the Discayas are Wawao Builders and St. Timothy Construction, which are connected to the anomalies. Along with this, the Commission on Audit (COA) found that the overall worth of flood control projects that are considered as substandard, overpriced, or non-existent were about P341 million (Panti, 2025).
The absurd amount of construction companies, owned by Pacifico II and Sarah Discaya, are alleged to have participated in orchestrated biddings and kickback schemes (Senate of the Philippinesโ Press Release, 2025). In an interview, the couple sighs the phrase, โkaya this!โ while implicating the involvement of lawmakers like House Speaker Martin Romualdez, Representative Zaldy Co, and many others (Gomez, 2025). Other than lawmakers, several DPWH officials are also under investigation for allegedly supervising project releases, accepting and extorting bribes, and permitting projects with defective features (Servallos and Galvez, 2025). Ultimately, these investigations were led by the COA, the Senate of the Philippines, alongside President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. as he described the situation as โhorribleโ and called for an independent commission initiative to probe the anomalies (Gomez, 2025).
With issues on accountability, the public called out for budget scrutiny, particularly highlighting the significant cuts in flood control allocations (Ager, 2025). Former Senate President Francis โChizโ Escudero suggested deduction of P250.8 billion from the proposed 2026 DPWH flood control allocation, considering the current budget as asymmetrical (Senate of the Philippinesโ Press Release, 2025). To elaborate, the widespread public mistrust in the projectsโ quality gives rise to the need for reports of substandard materials, the ghost projects, and poor facilitation, which raises questions about whether allocations are accomplishing their intended purpose (Panti, 2025). The public not only calls for accountability and budget deduction, but also for transparency: transactions made by the DPWH to lawmakers without technical vetting or coordination with local government units (Bernardo, 2025). Consequently, it has been estimated that economic losses amount to P118.5 billion in the span of 2023-2025 due to the flood control project anomalies (Inosante, 2025).
Aside from this, the public came up with more specific questions: First and foremost, the public questioned how are the contractors able to pay or promise heavy kickbacks of 25-40% (Ramos, 2025) and still turn a profit or deliver acceptable work? What is the total amount of flood control budget taken by projects completed in name only, with serious defects, or non-existent? The Filipinos contested on why lawmakers inserted many flood control projects (Bernardo, 2025) without proper feasibility studies, engineering assessments, or LGU coordination. Lastly, they challenged the government on how they will assure the accountability and responsibility of contractors upon the projectsโ failures, instead of it falling on the taxpayers money (Senate of the Philippinesโ Press Release, 2025) to fund the repairs or reworks due to substandard quality.
In spite of the public raising such critical questions, lawmakers involved in the Discaya testimony still denied the allegations, like House Speaker Romualdez, who was in denial of receiving benefits from such schemes (Flores, 2025). Nevertheless, the COA and the Office of the Ombudsman are the leading figures in the investigation of the anomalies, with the recent findings of COA about the projectsโ defects (Panti, 2025). Even more, some segments from the Congress, particularly of Escudero, suggest the deducted P250.8 billion flood control funds be reallocated in other essential sectors like education, health, and in the food industry. โMas praktikal at makabubuti na tapyasan na muna ang pondong ilalaan para flood control at ibuhos ito sa mga sektor ng edukasyon, kalusugan, at produksyon ng pagkain habang hinihintay natin ang ADB-funded flood control master plan,โ(Senate of the Philippinesโ Press Release, 2025).
Henceforth, the flood control funds controversy posits a critical call for transparency on the spending of taxpayersโ money. Despite its evident corruption and shameless spendings on lavish lifestyles, the situation is still surrounded with ambiguity: ๐ฌ๐๐ก๐ก ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ฃ๐จ๐ฉ๐๐ฉ๐ช๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จโ ๐ง๐๐จ๐ฅ๐ค๐ฃ๐จ๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ฉ๐๐๐จ ๐๐จ๐จ๐ช๐ ๐ง๐๐จ๐ช๐ก๐ฉ ๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐ง๐ช๐ ๐ง๐๐๐ค๐ง๐ข๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ, ๐ค๐ง ๐ฌ๐๐ก๐ก ๐ก๐ค๐ค๐ฅ๐๐ค๐ก๐๐จ ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ช๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐ฎ ๐ฅ๐ง๐๐ซ๐๐๐ก? Moving forward, many Filipinos depend on the handling of this controversy with the credibility of future infrastructure projects, their safety, and their overall trust in the government.
