Background
The Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) is pursuing an investigation into flood control projects linked to high-profile contractors in the Philippines. On Wednesday, October 15, ICI Executive Director Brian Hosaka confirmed that the controversial pair, Curlee and Sarah Discaya, have chosen not to cooperate with the probe. The development marks another twist in a case that has drawn attention from the public and oversight bodies alike.
The Withdrawal Noted
In a press conference held on the same day, Hosaka stated that the couple invoked their right against self-incrimination and declared they would no longer participate in the ICI’s investigation. He emphasized that the decision was a personal legal choice rather than a result of any change in the commission’s investigative process.
“They invoked their right against self-incrimination and manifested that they will no longer cooperate with the investigation being conducted by the ICI,” Hosaka said. He added that the couple previously anticipated that cooperation might yield a favorable recommendation from the commission as state witnesses, an expectation he described as a misinterpretation of the process.
Why the Statements Matter
The assertion by ICI Commissioner and former Public Works Secretary Rogelio “Babes” Singson, which was later echoed by journalist Karen Davila, appears to have influenced the decision. Singson indicated in an interview that the couple were not being considered as state witnesses, a statement that circulated in media reports after the interview on October 13. The video of that interview further publicized the evolving narrative around the investigation.
Impact on the Investigation
Hosaka noted that despite the withdrawal, the ICI’s inquiry is not put on hold. The commission already has access to numerous documents provided by the couple, and the investigative process will continue with other evidentiary sources. The ICI’s approach emphasizes documentary progress and witness testimonies that are not restricted to a single party’s cooperation.
Legal and Oversight Context
In governance matters, individuals involved in infrastructure projects often face questions about bidding, compliance, and accountability. The ICI, tasked with safeguarding infrastructure quality and public funds, operates under a framework that allows investigations even when participants exercise their rights. The current development reflects a balance between protecting individual legal rights and sustaining a robust inquiry that can rely on documentary trails and independent corroboration.
What Comes Next
With the Discayas opting out of direct cooperation, the ICI may focus on other lines of inquiry, including procurement records, project timelines, financial transactions, and environmental compliance data. The commission’s public statements suggest a continued commitment to transparency as it tallies documents, cross-referencing them with testimonies from other involved parties and independent experts.
Public Interest and Reactions
Infrastructure projects in the Philippines attract scrutiny due to potential impacts on communities, flood management outcomes, and public expenditures. Stakeholders are watching how the ICI handles the expansion of its evidence base and how it communicates progress to the public. While the withdrawal of the Discayas could complicate the narrative for some observers, it may also underscore the importance of verifiable documentation in corruption-related inquiries.
Conclusion
As the ICI presses forward, the case against possible missteps in flood control contracts remains in the public eye. The Discayas’ decision to refrain from further cooperation will not halt the investigation, according to ICI leadership, which remains focused on gathering comprehensive evidence to illuminate project integrity and protect public interests in the Philippines.
