Dear Editor,

Going over the updates on the progress of the investigations and actions being taken to address the corruption in flood control projects, I find it hard to understand — and I think many who are familiar with construction will agree with me — why it appears that the contractor is the party being prosecuted and could turn out to be the party to be jailed. The contractor is more likely not the perpetrator of the corruption but its victim.

Under normal procedures, the contractor goes through a strict examination and is prequalified by the DPWH as a bidder, and he then submits a bid. If his bid is the lowest, and it meets all the requirements, he is awarded the contract, and he proceeds with the execution of the project. The money the contractor receives is based on the amount of work accomplished. He is expected to complete the work within the contract schedule and budget. It is, of course, expected that the contractor will make a reasonable profit.

Corruption comes in when government officials demand a share of the payments made to the contractor. They threaten not to release or to delay the payments unless the contractor comes across. This is no different from the protection money demanded by gangsters from private businesses.

The payoffs reduce the contractor’s funds to complete the project. He has to complete an entire project with a reduced budget. In that respect, we can say that he is more a victim than a perpetrator of corruption.

When does the contractor become the perpetrator of corruption? Does he become a perpetrator of corruption when he submits a very high bid? No, because if his bid exceeds a certain percentage of the government (DPWH) estimate, his bid is disqualified and the contract will not be awarded to him.

Does he become a perpetrator of corruption when he does not complete the project? No, because payments to contractors are based on accomplishment. If he fails to implement portions of the contract, he will not get paid. And no, because that is non-compliance with the contract requirements and his contract will get cancelled by the DPWH and his performance bond will be confiscated.

Thereafter, the contractor is blacklisted by the DPWH and becomes ineligible to bid for succeeding projects. Here again, he is a victim of corruption because he will be unable to continue with the practice of his trade.

A Twist in the Perspective

There is, however, a slight but crucial twist in the perspective of the investigation. The issue is the theft of government money. The contractor then ceases to be a victim but becomes an accomplice.

There you are, guys. Let’s not talk about corruption. Instead, let us talk about theft, the blatant stealing of government money. Let’s not talk of corrupt officials in government. Let us talk of thieves in government. Let the axe fall where it should and let heads roll. More power to the Ombudsman!

Engr. Dennis Abcede

Founder, D. Abcede

Construction Management