The trajectory of the flood control corruption investigations is understandably to digress from the old rules that were found to be counter-intuitive. Unfortunately, unless and until new laws are written, some typical “placebo policies” of the present dispensation remain the currency.

The yolk of a wicked administrative environment becomes hard to break to give birth to a new socio-legal order. After all, everything about this government is being showcased as a “Potemkin village” where things are not what they seem.

Out of frustration, most citizens embrace the mistaken belief that the ideal order could still come about if and when people vote for the right candidates in an election. Sadly, it never really becomes the case since the ruling political elites always win the voters’ preference over to their side.

Even voters themselves already know the drill and succumb to it. In essence, it’s not about achieving an equilibrium that isn’t there, however much desired.

The general sentiment over the infamous 2025 “looting or heist” of several hundred billion pesos from government coffers in a syndicated corruption is to find Mr. Big. Where art thou, the immediate ringleaders under the kingpin’s reins, unless there’s yet another l’eminence grise?

Some political analysts insist the “buck stops at the Palace” rather than shifting blame to what Sen. Marcoleta refers to as a “scapegoat.” This floodgate corruption, being a “whole-of-society” concern, should not resort to a blame game. Ironically, FM Jr. is not in the mold of US President Harry Truman.

Let’s hazard some guesses on what the proposed legislations would revolve around that the Lacson-led Senate Blue Ribbon Committee would churn out vis-à-vis overarching contrary worldviews. In no pecking order, here are eight potential legislative measures, viz:

First, a Senate Bill requiring all notaries public to sign every document needing a corresponding signature and a prohibition on delegating the same, this despite the public at large not caring about common documents needing notarization.

Second, an SB requiring private contractors to have a paid-up capital proportionate to the fiscal ceiling of their financial transaction with the government and a prohibition on disproportionality, in like vein. The general public regards them as largely reliable contractors with higher rates of paid-up capital over otherwise dubious fly-by-night operators.

Third, an SB imposing a ban on members of the Philippine Contractors Accreditation Board from participating in government infrastructure projects unless they show proof of the absence of conflict of interest. Still, most citizens are more concerned about rigid screening in classifying contractors under high-order categories.

Fourth, an SB punishing the act of grand corruption committed by public officials and private individuals invariably with suspension, dismissal, asset forfeiture. But the outraged public would rather scream for the death penalty.

Fifth, an SB rationalizing that a high crime when committed should be grounded on wherever the evidence leads. Yet, officialdom floated the self-contradictory view that, “bending the law isn’t breaking the law.”

Sixth, an SB indoctrinating in both public and private schools the value of love consistent with the ICI’s iteration, viz: “What the world needs now is love, not greed, not selfishness.” Could such an alien avowal prevent social movements against corruption in government from convulsing?

Seventh, an SB prescribing the niceties or limits of interparliamentary courtesy as a mechanism enhancing the principle of the separation of powers and co-equality of the three branches of government. So far, citizens would argue against this machination in favor of transparency and accountability.

Eighth, an SB on a self-destruct mode to end the “era of the power broker,” however, this runs counter to the usual bureaucratic notion that it is “better to be within the system than perpetually without.” At critical junctures, shouldn’t public officials instead pivot to a “good society” and be “good commissioners?”

Be they old laws or new ones written, there ought to be a “moral true North” that is universal, to break the crippling barriers of patronage, rent-seeking, parochial interests. But, wouldn’t that be like finding another altar to worship at?

Walk us through, please.