The slim prospect of any major players, or senators, involved in the P545.64-million flood control scandal ending up behind bars — and thus being prevented from further plundering public funds — is reflected in the case of Senator Joel Villanueva.

Villanueva was the subject of an order from the Office of the Ombudsman in 2016 regarding his culpability in the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) scandal.

Then Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales found that Villanueva, as the Cibac party-list representative in the House from 2002 to 2010, had benefited from kickbacks in pork barrel projects.

Carpio-Morales wanted Villanueva, then a senator in 2016, to be disqualified from holding public office.

Carpio-Morales’ order directed the dismissal of Villanueva from public service and declared him permanently disqualified from holding any government post due to the findings of grave misconduct, serious dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, all related to the alleged misuse of P10 million in PDAF funds for a ghost project funneled through a questionable non-government organization (NGO) linked to Janet Napoles, the PDAF scam mastermind.

The PDAF was a lump sum fund granted to senators and representatives that was ruled illegal by the Supreme Court as it went against the constitutional provision on the separation of powers of the legislative and executive branches.

Villanueva’s defense then was that his identity had been cloned. He claimed his name and signature were used without his permission, insisting that he never received any PDAF funds as he was part of the congressional minority at the time.

Carpio-Morales’ dismissal order was never implemented because the Senate is an “old boys club.”

Instead of following the Ombudsman’s order, the Senate refused to enforce it, claiming the Ombudsman had no jurisdiction over an elected official.

The senators shielding Villanueva argued that only the Senate ethics committee could discipline, suspend, or expel its members, citing the separation of powers doctrine.

Carpio-Morales noted that, due to the Senate’s abject refusal, the Philippines was an international laughingstock for failing to enforce its own laws against an official found guilty of wrongdoing.

Aside from the administrative case, Villanueva also faced criminal charges before the Sandiganbayan for malversation of public funds and graft, related to the PDAF scam.

These criminal cases remain pending in court, nearly nine years later, apparently placed on the back burner by the previous Ombudsman administrations.

Now Villanueva is among the senators being linked to alleged kickbacks from anomalous DPWH flood control projects in Bulacan.

He has a new script, claiming there is no basis for the allegations and he is being made a “sacrificial lamb” for the 2028 elections.

The Independent Commission for Infrastructure included him in a lookout order submitted to the Department of Justice.

Since the Senate can put up a shield for Villanueva, it could extend the same protection to him when the final verdict is handed down, if it comes to that.

An official convicted by the Ombudsman continues to benefit from the power he has been disqualified from exercising.

Is there a worst injustice?