The decision of the Office of the Ombudsman to turn former Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Secretary Manuel Bonoan into one of its state witnesses merely “awards bad behavior” when it came to the flood control issue, a youth group said.

In a statement, Samahan ng Progresibong Kabataan (SPARK) opposed the recent announcement of Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla of its plans to utilize the knowledge that Bonoan had as a DPWH official to build cases against other officials involved in the scandal.

The group asserted that the testimonies provided by former DPWH officials Henry Alcantara and Brice Hernandez were proof enough that there were countless anomalous projects in their department.

“By allowing Bonoan to become a state witness, the Ombudsman is awarding bad behavior and shifting the blame from President Marcos and his administration in their role regarding widespread plunder and fraud,” SPARK said.

Another factor that was particularly alarming for the group was the fact that the former Public Works Secretary was given “special treatment” despite being charged with plunder and graft cases.

According to them, Bonoan was privileged enough to be granted hospital arrest at the PNP General Hospital amid his worsening health condition, while ordinary Filipinos were made to endure their sentences regardless of the seriousness of the crime.

“It was already unacceptable that Bonoan be given special treatment in Camp Crame of all places…now he also stands to get off basically scot-free so long as he cooperates with the Ombudsman for its clearly biased and partisan agenda,” they explained.

SPARK further maintained that the delay in the filing of cases against public officials was a clear sign that their anti-corruption campaign was “weak and ineffectual” as it repeatedly failed to meet the timelines that it set for itself.

It noted that in a case that has had such a massive impact on the country, any public official found to have been involved in the scandal should be held accountable to the highest extent of the law.

“Thieves like Bonoan should not receive anything less than the full and maximum penalty for stealing from the public coffers,” they maintained.

To recall, Remulla and Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano have both stated in separate press conferences that the testimony of Bonoan was meant to strengthen their case build-ups against the orchestrators of the anomalies in infrastructure projects–namely former House Speaker Martin Romualdez.

The officials stressed that Bonoan was vital in their investigation because of his first hand knowledge of how the scheme was carried out, being “in the room” when the budget insertions, kickbacks, and percentages were being determined.

However, as Clavano mentioned, Bonoan being completely dropped in the case where he was said to be a co-conspirator of former Senator Jinggoy Estrada still rested on whether the Sandiganbayan would grant their request to amend their case information.

As of writing, the anti-graft court has yet to release an official resolution for the pending motion.