Overview: ICI tightens the net on flood control anomalies
The Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) is stepping up efforts to recover assets tied to alleged corruption in flood control projects. Chairman Andres Reyes Jr. announced that while pursuing prosecutions for those involved, the commission is also pursuing restitution — the act of restoring lost funds and compensating the Filipino people for money misused in infrastructure schemes.
Restitution as a core aim
Reyes, a former Supreme Court justice, described restitution as more than punishment. He defined it as “the act of making good or giving equivalent for any loss, damage or injury and indemnification.” The ICI frames restitution as the necessary complement to justice, arguing that assets purchased with public funds belong to the Filipino people and should be recovered and returned to funding essential services such as schools and hospitals.
Evidence and investigators target the Discayas
ICI Special Adviser Rodolfo Azurin Jr. stated they have gathered enough evidence to file charges against contractor couple Cezarah Rowena “Sarah” and Pacifico “Curlee” Discaya in connection with anomalous flood control projects. The probe has uncovered irregularities across numerous contracts tied to the Discayas, potentially resulting in multiple criminal cases upon completion.
Azurin noted that the Discayas were involved in approximately 1,000 contracts with the Department of Public Works and Highways, signaling a broad scope for potential charges. The couple has stopped cooperating with the investigation, invoking their right against self-incrimination. The ICI, however, will continue its work and prepare necessary recommendations for the Ombudsman and other authorities.
What restitution means for the public purse
The ICI insists that funds diverted to luxury purchases and other non-productive uses represent a direct betrayal of public trust. Reyes emphasized that money intended for critical infrastructure—roads, bridges, water systems—could instead be funding the daily lives and safety of ordinary Filipinos. The pursuit of restitution, in this view, is a reclamation of the public budget from corrupt actors.
Interagency cooperation and next steps
Participants in the ICI asset recovery meeting included Public Works Secretary Vince Dizon, Customs Commissioner Ariel Nepomuceno, and representatives from the Justice Department, Anti-Money Laundering Council, and other key agencies. The goal is to coordinate a comprehensive framework for asset recovery, define timelines, and estimate recoverable amounts.
Procedural updates
Executive Director Brian Keith Hosaka confirmed ongoing investigations despite the Discayas’ decision to discontinue cooperation. He indicated that the evidence gathered thus far will suffice to advance cases and that follow-up coordination will refine the recovery strategy and timelines.
Broader implications for governance
The case highlights the governance question of how to deter bid manipulation and cost overruns in essential public works. By linking justice with restitution, the ICI seeks not only to punish wrongdoing but to restore trust and ensure that future infrastructure spending benefits the public rather than a few.
Judicial developments
Separately, a Pasay City court denied a habeas corpus petition by Curlee Discaya seeking release from Senate detention, ruling the petition lacking merit and severed from the main action. This procedural decision is part of a web of cases linked to the broader investigation into infrastructure corruption.
Conclusion: A pledge to finish the job
As investigations proceed, the ICI’s resolve to pursue restitution alongside traditional charges signals a holistic approach to anti-corruption in infrastructure. The recovery of assets is framed not just as compensation for losses but as a corrective measure to restore public confidence in government-led flood control and other critical projects.
