SC orders Senate Blue Ribbon to explain bid to keep flood control draft report under wraps

PING LACSON
Photo courtesy of Senate

PING LACSON
Photo courtesy of Senate

The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee (BRC) assured Minority Leader Alan Cayetano on Sunday that it would resume its stalled…

Senator Alan Peter Cayetano on Sunday hit back at Senator Panfilo "Ping" Lacson after the latter vowed to gather…

Senator Panfilo "Ping" Lacson on Sunday said he is gathering informants and witnesses to build a case against Sen. Alan…

Former House Speaker and Leyte Rep. Martin Romualdez is prepared to face any complaint before the Office of the…

Senator Panfilo Lacson insinuated the existence of a multibillion-peso flood control project irregularity in Taguig…
The Supreme Court (SC) has ordered the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee to submit its comment on a petition seeking the public release of its draft partial report on the controversial flood control scandal—signaling the start of judicial scrutiny over the document’s secrecy.
In an en banc resolution, the High Court directed the respondents, led by Blue Ribbon chairperson Senator Panfilo “Ping” Lacson, to respond within 10 days but stressed that it has not yet given due course to the petition.
At the same time, it denied the petitioners’ request for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and a status quo ante order, allowing the committee to maintain control of the document for now.
The petition was filed by lawyers Eldrige Marvin Aceron, Sikini Labastilla, and Purificacion Bartolome-Bernabe, who went to the Court as citizens and legal professionals.
They are asking the Court to compel the release of the committee’s draft partial report, arguing that it has become a matter of urgent public interest amid allegations tied to alleged irregularities in flood control projects.
Also named respondents include Senators Juan Miguel Zubiri, JV Ejercito, and Sherwin Gatchalian, as well as the Senate of the Philippines, represented by the Senate President.
At the center of the dispute is a draft partial report allegedly containing findings and recommendations, which the petitioners say should be made public. They claim access was previously denied after the committee invoked the deliberative process privilege.
The committee, however, maintained that releasing internal drafts could undermine frank discussion and create a chilling effect on legislative deliberations.
The petitioners countered this, arguing that the privilege no longer applies after Lacson publicly discussed portions of the draft in interviews and official statements.
They also pointed to media reports suggesting the draft recommended filing plunder and other criminal charges against certain incumbent officials over alleged flood control irregularities.