Call it remorse by any other name, but I am not biting.
Recent reports about former Department of Public Works and Highways Undersecretary Roberto Bernardo’s willingness to return the kickbacks he received with his involvement in the corruption tied to flood control projects is a concerning development for government accountability.
I hope the Department of Justice considers the implications of his testimony in the broader context of corruption in the public sector, as Bernardo expressed regret for his actions.
It was Senator Sherwin Gatchalian who broke the news about Bernardo’s willingness to return the kickbacks. It is a rare yet welcome act when public officials acknowledge their involvement in corrupt practices and take steps toward restitution.
A pledge to return funds is not merely a symbolic gesture; it is an acknowledgment of wrongdoing, providing the public and the justice system with an opportunity to hold accountable those who exploit their positions for personal gain.
While Bernardo’s statement adds significant weight to the ongoing investigation, it is important to carefully evaluate his testimony. He has implicated several prominent figures, including senators and former lawmakers, but much of what he claims involved intermediaries.
This leaves room for ambiguity and the potential misuse of names. Do you know if the names cited accurately reflect their actions? The government should make sure that no one who may have been unfairly implicated becomes collateral damage in a larger scheme.
The complexities of corruption cases such as this one require thorough scrutiny. We applaud whistleblowers who courageously step forward, yet we urge investigators to conduct a meticulous review of all their allegations and separate the chaff from the grain.
Transparency must underpin the process to ensure that justice is served. Any investigation should reflect our commitment to transparency and integrity, striving not just to punish wrongdoers but to foster an environment in which accountability thrives.
I admire Bernardo for remaining in the Philippines, which distinguishes him from many whistleblowers who fear reprisal and seek refuge abroad. His presence alone indicates a willingness to confront the consequences of his actions.
Nevertheless, his decision should not exempt him from full accountability. We need a legal framework that allows for becoming a state witness while preserving the integrity of the justice system.
Any plea for leniency must be contingent on cooperation, avoiding any potential loophole that could allow him to escape the consequences of the corruption in which he has admitted participating.
The actions taken in this case could set a precedent for future investigations into government corruption. Trust in public institutions is eroding amid the ongoing scandal, so we must seize every opportunity to enforce ethical governance.
This moment could catalyze change, providing a chance to reflect on our systemic vulnerabilities and pursue a path that will strengthen accountability and transparency.
We deserve a government that acts with integrity, and we must hold accountable those we empower to represent us.
We all know that among men of greed, betrayal is punishable by death. I hope that Bernardo will cooperate fully and return everything that does not belong to him or his family, especially given the threats to his life.
Only then will I be convinced that he won’t die in vain should his adversary succeed in not making him talk any further.
(You may send comments and reactions to feedback032020@gmail.com or text 0931-1057135)