Senator Erwin Tulfo on Tuesday urged contractors and officials implicated in the flood control corruption scandal to return public funds allegedly stolen from infrastructure projects.
Tulfo, who serves as vice chairman of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, made the call during the panel’s fifth hearing into irregularities involving billions of pesos in flood control spending.
“I don’t know if you are all listening to the cries of the people, the thousands at the People Power Monument in Luneta. They were not only protesting theft, they were also shouting for their money to be returned,” he said.
Tulfo’s appeal came during a discussion on whether restitution should be a factor in determining eligibility for the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Witness Protection Program (WPP).
Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla told senators that restitution could reflect good faith on the part of applicants, though it is not explicitly required by law.
Senator Rodante Marcoleta countered that adding restitution as a prerequisite would exceed the limits of the statute governing the program.
Remulla stressed that while legal requirements matter, the government must also weigh what is morally right, given the gravity of the corruption scandal.
Tulfo agreed, saying that public interest and accountability should take precedence over technicalities in the law.
“What we are talking about here is not just the law. The people stand above the law,” he said.
Meanwhile, Senator Francis Pangilinan added that there is no legal barrier preventing suspects from voluntarily surrendering stolen assets, including luxury vehicles.
He noted that former assistant district engineer Brice Hernandez had already turned over vehicles to the Independent Commission for Infrastructure and expressed willingness to surrender more.
“Returning the money is a sign of cooperation, which the courts will eventually take into account when issuing a sentence or granting exemption and immunity,” said Pangilinan.
Senate Deputy Majority Leader also pointed out later that “while restitution is not a statutory prerequisite for discharge under Rule 119” of the WPP, “it is sound prosecutorial practice to require it as a condition for recommending state witness status.”
“Technically, once an accused is discharged and acquitted by operation of law, both criminal and implied civil liability in the case are extinguished, leaving the state to pursue separate civil or forfeiture actions that are cumbersome, protracted and often ineffective,” she explained.
Hontiveros noted that by seeking restitution or the possible turnover of ill-gotten assets, “prosecutors safeguard the public interest” to which Remulla agreed.
The DOJ is currently reviewing affidavits from several contractors and engineers for possible inclusion in the WPP.
