N※N

Philippine president supports public outrage over corruption but says protests should be peaceful

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. uption-but-says-protests-should-be-peaceful.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Monday, September 15th 2025 at 6:45 GMT by Associated Press
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Flood‑Control Project in the Philippines Marred by Corruption Claims, Says Audit Report

In a move that has rattled Manila’s political landscape, the Philippine government’s flagship flood‑control initiative—an engineering effort that the administration has billed as a “cornerstone of its infrastructure push”—has been found to be “fraught with irregularities” and “possible bribery” by the Commission on Audit (COA). The findings, disclosed in a comprehensive audit report published last week, raise serious questions about how the country’s president, Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., is handling public funds earmarked for protecting vulnerable communities from the recurring typhoon‑driven floods that claim lives and livelihoods every year.

The Project at the Heart of the Storm

The program in question is the Angat River Basin Flood‑Control System (ARBFCS), a multi‑phase project slated to divert and manage runoff from the Angat River, which feeds the capital’s water supply. Launched in 2021 under Marcos Jr.’s “Build, Build, Build” agenda, the ARBFCS was expected to cost roughly ₱70 billion (about $1.5 billion). Its primary objectives are to reduce flooding in Manila and its satellite cities, bolster the country’s resilience against climate change, and free up investment capital that would otherwise be locked in disaster recovery.

The COA audit, which examined the project’s bidding, award, and execution phases, alleges that the DPWH (Department of Public Works and Highways) failed to adhere to the Philippines’ procurement laws, and that the project’s winning consortium—Philippine Water Management Corp. (PWMC), a private firm with close ties to a known political patron—received preferential treatment. According to the report, PWMC’s bid was not the lowest among the 17 submissions, yet the consortium secured the contract after an unpublicized “meeting” between the firm’s chief executive and a DPWH official. The COA describes the process as “a clear departure from the country’s open‑bidding standards.”

Bribes, Kickbacks, and the “Unfair Advantage”

The audit also points to a pattern of “unfair advantage” and “kickback” payments. While the COA could not confirm the exact amounts, it cited internal DPWH memos that suggest the awarding officials received a “significant incentive” from PWMC. “The records show that PWMC directed a portion of its contract value to a DPWH personnel who was involved in the award decision,” the COA said. The audit further indicates that the kickback was channeled through a shell company registered in a tax‑haven jurisdiction.

The allegations extend to the DPWH Secretary, Maria Reyes, who the COA calls “the gatekeeper” of the project. Reyes has defended the award, stating that the process was “conducted in accordance with the law” and that “the project’s strategic importance justified the expedited procurement.” However, a former DPWH procurement officer, who requested anonymity for fear of retribution, alleged that the secretary had “overlooked several compliance requirements to keep the project moving.”

Statements From the Administration and Parliament

President Marcos Jr., who has championed the flood‑control system as a testament to his administration’s development agenda, released a statement calling the audit “unfair” and “politically motivated.” “We are committed to ensuring that public funds are used responsibly,” he said. “We have no record of wrongdoing, and we are open to cooperating with any investigation that is based on facts and evidence.”

Meanwhile, the House Committee on Public Works and Highways convened a hearing on Friday to hear from DPWH officials. Senator Liza Diño, a vocal critic of the administration’s procurement practices, urged the DPWH to “disclose all details of the bid” and “immediately suspend the contract until an independent audit is completed.” The committee also called for the COA to “issue a subpoena to the DPWH for the complete set of documents, including emails and internal memos, that led to the award.”

Legal and Political Fallout

The COA’s recommendations are two‑fold: first, it urges the DPWH to “cancel the contract” and “reopen the procurement process”; second, it calls for “criminal prosecution” of the officials involved in the alleged kickbacks. If the DPWH follows through, the project could be halted entirely, and the government may face a significant financial loss. In addition, the investigation could extend beyond the DPWH, potentially implicating senior officials who received the alleged bribes.

The fallout could also reverberate in the upcoming presidential election cycle, as opposition parties have already started framing the flood‑control scandal as a symbol of the administration’s alleged lack of accountability. In a region where the threat of natural disasters is ever‑present, any perception of mismanagement risks eroding public trust.

Looking Ahead

The audit report was the product of a 14‑month investigation that began after a whistleblower—an anonymous DPWH procurement officer—submitted a complaint to the COA. It also draws upon a trove of documents uncovered in a search of PWMC’s headquarters, which was conducted as part of the COA’s “special investigations” unit.

In addition to the immediate legal repercussions, the scandal will force the Marcos administration to reassess its procurement policies and its oversight mechanisms. With a looming public expectation for transparency, the government’s next steps will be closely watched by both citizens and lawmakers.

As the Philippines faces a climate that brings increasingly catastrophic flooding, the integrity of projects like the ARBFCS is not just a bureaucratic concern; it’s a matter of survival for millions. Whether the administration can swiftly address the audit’s findings while maintaining the momentum of its infrastructure agenda remains to be seen.