Haunting that never ends

I remember a childhood neighbor, Mang Berting, who blamed the same boy whenever mangoes went missing from his tree. Despite a broken fence and other possible culprits, he never stopped accusing him until the whole street believed it.

The boy never stole anything, but the relentless accusations became his punishment. With finger-pointing, the truth never mattered.

That memory came rushing back when I read Atty. Neil Abayon’s recent reaction to the Senate’s loud pronouncements against the Chinese Ambassador to the Philippines, Jing Quan, and the Chinese Embassy in Manila. His words were sharp and simple: “Ganyang energy din sana sa flood control, ‘bindalo,’ at ‘malita’ allegations.”

In other words, where is the same fire when the allegations involve flood control projects, the so-called “bendalo (bend the law),” and “maleta” controversies? Why the righteous fury at a foreign diplomat, but a curious calm when the trail leads to a domestic scandal of massive corruption?

As a citizen who reads the headlines, it’s hard to ignore the pattern in Senator Panfilo Lacson’s investigation. It began with alleged ghost projects in Taguig, which the DPWH disputed, citing documented accomplishments. Then came illegal reclamation on Laguna de Bay and allegedly fake land titles. Yet Philippine Reclamation Authority clarifications showed the evidence didn’t match the headlines, while the accusations kept expanding beyond what the facts appeared to support.

Each time, a name that kept surfacing was of a single person and place. How about the ghost flood control projects in Bulacan, Cebu, Southeastern Mindanao, and ghost irrigation projects in Leyte?

The connection was never clearly explained. It simply hung in the air with another headline, insinuation, and another brick in a wall that seemed to have been built around a conclusion decided long before the first hearing.

This is where the government’s haunting instinct kicks in. Many times, when the evidence isn’t enough to prove someone guilty, the search goes on — not necessarily to find the truth, but to find something that keeps the accusation alive.

Just like Vice President Sara Duterte’s impeachment trial, they throw everything at the wall and see what sticks.

At this point, is it finding the truth or keeping suspicion alive? A fair investigation follows the evidence wherever it leads. Has the verdict already been decided before the investigation even begins?

Given his experience as a former police chief, Senator Lacson understands the difference between suspicion, verified facts, and evidence that proves guilt in court. Allegations need solid evidence, and repeated accusations can damage reputations before the facts are established.

His experience is an opportunity to lead with greater care, fairness, and restraint.

Meanwhile, where is the same energy for the real masterminds of the flood control mess? The contractors who overbilled, the bureaucrats who signed off on padded documents, the middlemen who pocketed commissions, and the legislators who received stashes of cash are not being haunted. They are enjoying luxurious lives, perhaps watching this circus with a wide grin.

The Senate and House of Representatives’ spotlight is fixed on political rivals, while the actual architects of the scandal remain comfortably in the shadows. That is the tragedy of this haunting — it targets the wrong “ghosts.”

Agencies like the DPWH, PRA, and the Ombudsman risk being dragged into a political tug-of-war. They need room to follow the evidence and reach their own conclusions without being pressured to pick a side. The mark of a serious investigator is not how many accusations he can level against a rival. It is how faithfully he follows the evidence, even when it does not support his suspicions.

This is why the Supreme Court’s recent ruling matters so much. By declaring key provisions of the 2024 and 2025 General Appropriations Acts unconstitutional — specifically the Unprogrammed Appropriations that inflated the budget by hundreds of billions and the SAGIP lump-sum provisions that became a “covert repository” for flood control projects — the High Court has effectively drawn a diagram of the broken fence.

It has told us, in formal legal language, where the real structural failure lies: not in one city, not in one senator’s accusations, but in a budget process that allowed hidden, discretionary funds to flow toward the very projects now under scrutiny.

The doctrine of operative fact may protect completed projects and good-faith beneficiaries, but it does not protect the architects.

The haunting, in other words, has been aimed at the wrong ghost all along — and the SC has now said so.

Mang Berting eventually stopped pointing at the boy. Yet the mangoes kept disappearing. The real thief was never the boy, but the broken fence and the open gate.

The same is true here. The flood control scandal will not be solved by haunting one man or one city.

It will be solved by following the money, wherever it leads — even if it leads to friends, allies, and the powerful few who are laughing at us all. Anything less is just another haunting that never ends.