WE SEE some judicial insight in what Malacanang Communications Officer Claire Castro said while chasing the push in the Senate to create an Independent People’s Commission (IPC) similar to the existing Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI).
We see legal prudence in what she said in a radio interview Sunday, heard nationwide, as she raised a signpost the establishment of an IPC might be redundant since its functions may already be covered by the Office of the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice.
Fact is, Ombudsman Crispin Jesus Crispin Remulla himself said the ICI has only about one to two months left before it concludes its investigation into alleged anomalies in flood control projects and turns over all findings to the Ombudsman’s Office for further action.
Remulla stressed the ICI is not a permanent body and its evidence gathering will significantly help the Ombudsman’s ongoing cases.
The ICI was never intended to be a permanent agency, and the Ombudsman’s office is prepared to take over.
The ICI was created under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s Executive Order 94 to investigate widespread corruption, irregularities, and fund misuse in flood control and other major government infrastructure projects over the past decade.
It was intended to restore public trust and ensure accountability, and its mandate includes fact-finding, subpoenaing witnesses and documents, freezing assets, and recommending criminal/civil/administrative cases to bodies like the Ombudsman or the Department of Justice, acting as an independent watchdog to uncover systemic abuse.
Verily, the goal was to bring transparency and integrity back to public service and infrastructure projects, as public funds were being betrayed, and to separate fact from speculation and provide clarity on the scale of anomalies which, from where we are, we can see despite the recent resignation of a member of the three-person body.
In the meanwhile, soon after the resignation of ICI member former DPWH Secretary Rogelio Singson, some political observers have asked why the ICI does not have contempt power.
This power is vested in a court or legislative body to punish individuals for disobeying its orders or showing disrespect to its proceedings, which includes punishing for actions like lying under oath, refusing to provide documents, or disrupting court proceedings.
Palace Press Undersecretary Castro is on course in explaining the ICI does not have contempt power, which only a court of law and a legislative body have.
While we share the disquiet in the people watching what appears to be a slow grind of justice, we feel the ICI is doing its best to follow every paper trail and statements under oath, not wild accusations to gain the theater’s center stage.
