Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson, the newly re-elected Senate President Pro Tempore and returning Chairman of the influential Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, has announced a vigorous resumption of the investigation into the multi-billion-peso flood control anomalies. In a recent public briefing, Lacson signaled his unwavering resolve to follow the evidence wherever it may lead, emphasizing the right of every Filipino to uncover the truth behind this massive corruption scandal.
The planned resumption of the hearing, tentatively set for November 14, aims to move the probe from mere exposé to concrete prosecution and conviction, with a focus on delivering “airtight cases” against errant government officials and contractors.
🎙️ The Return to the Helm: Unwavering Commitment
Addressing questions about his return to the chairmanship, a position he had previously resigned from due to reported disagreements over the investigation’s direction, Senator Lacson was definitive. “I’ll accept,” he stated, confirming his readiness to once again lead the anti-corruption body.
He dismissed concerns that his renewed chairmanship might destabilize the Senate leadership, an issue he has already discussed with Senate President Vicente Sotto III. “I don’t think so. That much, I was assured by the Senate President,” he asserted, adding that his core principle remains unchanged: “Where the evidence leads us, we will go there.”
This principle underscores the committee’s commitment to impartiality, despite the difficult position of investigating potential misconduct among colleagues or high-ranking government figures. The mandate is clear: the pursuit of truth must take precedence over political considerations.
🔑 A ‘Very Important Witness’ and the Search for Corroboration
The upcoming hearing is centered on the testimony of a new, highly anticipated witness. Lacson described this individual as “very important” because their testimony is crucial to “wrap up” the information needed for prosecution and conviction.
New Revelations: The witness is expected to provide fresh information that has not yet been presented by previous resource persons.
Airtight Affidavit: The Senator is personally overseeing the finalization of the witness’s affidavit, stressing the necessity of documentary proof. “If he will just mention names without supporting documents, then he shouldn’t mention them, because he might just destroy the person,” Lacson affirmed. This approach highlights a commitment to procedural rigor, ensuring that all allegations are backed by hard evidence such as ledgers, digital files, and comprehensive notes.
The Conduit: The new witness did not volunteer directly but reached out through a “conduit,” suggesting a carefully managed approach to their security and testimony.
🕵️ The Mystery of Witness Gutesa and the Marcoleta Angle
A significant portion of the discussion revolved around the disappearance of the former “surprise witness,” Orly Gutesa, who previously implicated former House Speaker Martin Romualdez and former Ako Bicol Party-list Representative Zaldy Co.
Lacson confirmed that efforts are still being made to locate Gutesa, not to put him under duress, but to give him an opportunity to “sue up” or clarify his earlier testimony and provide additional corroborating documents.
The CCTV Review: Lacson clarified that his team’s effort to review the Senate’s CCTV footage from September 25 was not an attempt to “spy” on Senator Rodante Marcoleta, who introduced Gutesa. The real objective was to identify the person accompanying Gutesa to serve the witness an invitation through that individual, as Gutesa had gone missing.
Corroboration is Key: The Senator remains skeptical about the strength of Gutesa’s testimony alone, especially given the controversy surrounding the notarization of his affidavit. “Being an investigator for so long… it is difficult for a case to stand on the word of one person alone,” he noted, underlining the critical need for corroborating evidence. This is particularly relevant after reports suggested Gutesa may have joined former Congressman Saldico abroad—a report the committee is still attempting to validate.
Credibility Issue: While Gutesa’s original testimony remains valid in the context of the Blue Ribbon hearing because he was administered an oath, Lacson admitted that the issue of the falsified notarization inevitably affects his overall credibility.
🏛️ Inter-Parliamentary Courtesy vs. The Pursuit of Truth
On the matter of inviting former Speaker Romualdez to testify, Senator Lacson was guided by the principle of inter-parliamentary courtesy.
The Invitation Protocol: Romualdez will be invited through the current Speaker of the House, as this courtesy is accorded to the institution, not the individual.
Voluntary Appearance: Lacson said Romualdez is free to attend to respond to the allegations raised by Gutesa. However, unlike the process for a non-member who evades a subpoena (which can lead to a contempt citation and warrant of arrest, potentially requiring Interpol assistance), the Senate must observe the courtesy in this case.
For former Congressman Saldico, the process is different: an invitation will be sent to his established residence, and a failure to heed it may result in a subpoena, followed by a contempt citation and an arrest warrant—a process that could potentially involve international agencies like Interpol if he remains outside the country.
💰 Targeting the System: Budget Reforms and Accountability
The Blue Ribbon probe is not just about individuals; it is fundamentally about systemic corruption in the national budget process, particularly within the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).
Suing the Descaya Couple: The committee plans to issue a subpoena duces tecum (a legal writ requiring the production of documents) to the contractor couple, Mr. and Mrs. Descaya. Their testimony alleging that 17 congressmen received kickbacks is considered vital for strengthening the documentary evidence.
Budgetary Overhaul: A major reform target is the removal of unprogrammed funds (except for foreign-assisted projects, special purpose funds, and quick-reaction funds) and the full transparency of the budget up to the bicameral conference (Bicam). Lacson and other senators are pushing to limit the Bicam to strictly reconciling disagreeing provisions between the House and Senate versions, thus eliminating the possibility of “alien” provisions being inserted without scrutiny.
The MAIP Consolidation: He confirmed plans to consolidate the scattered social service funds, including the Medical Assistance for Indigent Patients (MAIP) fund, under the Universal Health Care program, eliminating the need for legislators to issue guarantee letters and removing their role in implementation—a major source of political patronage and corruption.
Senator Lacson ended with a powerful statement, likening the cyclical nature of corruption to an endless loop that must be broken. He stressed the need for the government’s sustained effort to get to the bottom of all anomalies now, rather than repeating the investigation in five or ten years, thus ensuring that those responsible for the country’s woes are held accountable.