Two infrastructure projects with an alleged aggregated cost of P100 million each in Senator Alan Cayetano’s turf in Taguig had a “double appropriation” in the 2025 national budget, Senator Ping Lacson said, citing findings by his office. 

“Double appropriations” suggests that one of the slope protection projects may be “ghost” or non-existent because the budget was allocated for two separate projects found identical to each other, according to Lacson.

The latest findings by Lacson’s office raised to P2.4 billion the suspected anomalous projects in Taguig, which allegedly formed part of the P6.8 billion worth of Cayetano’s “insertions” in the 2025 budget. 

"From P2.085 billion as earlier reported, we found three P100 million additional slope protection projects for a new total of P2.385 billion insertions under the 2025 GAA (General Appropriations Act). Two items appear to be double appropriations, involving two P100 million for the same slope protection project. One of the two must be ghost," Lacson said on X, formerly Twitter, on Wednesday. 

The findings followed the deepening word war between the lawmakers, who have been trading barbs since early May, after Cayetano launched a coup to remove then Senate president Tito Sotto, only to be ousted two weeks later. 

Although tensions only escalated after Cayetano questioned the sharp increase in Lacson’s net worth from 2022 to 2025, despite not being in government service at the time. 

Lacson took offense at Cayetano, saying he “crossed the line” by insinuating corruption on his part, which tainted the integrity he long protected. 

‘No turning back’

As a result, Lacson officially declared war with Cayetano and vowed to investigate all of his pet projects, including flood control.

Cayetano has repeatedly denied that there are “ghost” projects in Taguig, though he welcomed any probe because his existing projects could withstand scrutiny. He, however, cried foul over why Taguig was being singled out despite reports of alleged rampant “ghost” projects in Ilocos Norte, the President’s bailiwick. 

Over the weekend, Lacson claimed that their initial findings in Taguig revealed projects involving firms owned by the detained Discaya couple but implemented by another contractor under a 5 percent royalty scheme.

The findings also included similar projects contracted to Topnotch Catalyst Builders, which is among the top 15 flood control project contractors flagged by the President last year in his SONA.

The projects, including those involving Discaya-owned firms, dated back to 2019 and 2020, when Cayetano was still the House Speaker.

In an ambush interview on Thursday, Senate Blue Ribbon Committee chair Erwin Tulfo said he will review the alleged irregular projects in Taguig once Lacson furnished him a copy of the findings. 

The BRC was formerly headed by Lacson before Tulfo took over following the leadership shakeup. 

The powerful committee will resume its flood control probe after the President’s SONA on Monday, 27 July, though Tulfo said the investigation will not be confined only to Taguig.

He announced that the committee will also invite ex-lawmaker Elizaldy Co’s alleged former bodyguards—who implicated several lawmakers, including Tulfo himself, in the “maleta” scheme—on the condition that they will execute an individual affidavit. 

The 18 bodyguards had repeatedly alleged that they delivered “maletas” to several members of Congress allied with President Marcos Jr. during their time serving as security aides of Co, who was when he was still the chair of the House appropriations panel in the 19th Congress.

The cash was allegedly obtained through kickbacks from ghost or substandard flood control projects.

The group's credibility, however, was put into question after the Armed Forces of the Philippines disowned several of them, while the majority had been dishonorably discharged. 

The AFP also claimed that the group was no longer in the service at the time of the alleged deliveries. The group, in response, denied receiving P5 million each in bribes from Defensor, as alleged by the NBI, to fabricate the “fictitious” testimonies, which was a repeat of their February affidavit.