The revelation of a ‘ghost factory’ of flood control projects in Bulacan’s First District Engineering Office by the Commission on Audit (COA)-initially worth P340-P360 million-confirms the existence of its systematic and syndicated theft of taxpayer funds.
Forged documents, mismatched addresses, and duplicate claims were all parts of this elaborate and time-consuming recycling plan. Results from the audit indicate that district engineers and contractors led them to locations that did not comply with the contract specifications, that slope protection and riverbank structures were already in place when the contracts began, and that critical documents were missing.
A system where, a factory turns paper into profit, where contractors are paid in advance for projects that were never developed, or finished works counted more than once, and records vanish. Deeply involved is a syndicate inside the DPWH DEO involving all of its senior officials.
The recent Senate Blue Ribbon committee hearings were equally explosive. OIC ARD and former DE Henry Alcantara confirmed that there are approximately 50 ghost flood control projects implemented in his district, with an estimated cost of P4 to P5 billion. He insisted he has no participation in those ghost projects and pointed to the culprits led by former DE Brice Hernandez and the others.
in contrast, DE Hernandez says he was merely following instructions from his boss Alcantara under a 40-20 -20-20 partition rule for ghost projects with Alcantara getting 40 percent while he and engineers Jaypee Mendoza and Paul Duya get 20 percent each.
In a later hearing, resigned DPWH Usec Roberto Bernardo denied his involvement but confirmed in his affidavit the 40-20-20-20 partition rule on ghost projects of Alcantara, Hernandez and engineers Jaypee Mendoza and Arjay Domasig.
There were inconsistencies between Alcantara, Hernandez and Bernardo specifically on their respective shares. Bernardo said he was only getting 15 percent from Alcantara , but Hernandez and Jaypee Mendoza insisted that they are preparing 25 to 30 percent for Usec Bernardo. There was also talk that from the 25 percent commission allegedly for rep. Zaldy Co, both Bernardo and Alcantara they claim receive just 1 percent each.
It was a great though that DPWH sec. Vince Dizon acted quickly and seventeen officials of the Bulacan First district Engineering office from top to bottom including all section chiefs and engineers were dismissed administratively, filed charges before the Ombudsman and ordered an AMLC asset freeze against them.
Also charged were contractors Cezarah Rowena C. Discaya of St. Timothy Construction Corp., Mark Allan V. Arevalo, owner of Wawao Builders, Sally Santos of Syms Construction Trading, and Robert T. Imperio, owner of IM Construction Corp.
The billions of pesos pocketed by this syndicated operation flooded tax payers money into their private pockets. No wonder, most of them lived in shameless lifestyle while and racking up massive gambling losses of P950 million in thirteen casinos spread over Metro Manila, Cebu, and Pampanga for many years.
But another worrying fact is Alcantara’s influence on neighboring DPWH engineering districts. Funds totaling P5.6 billion allegedly coming from Rep. Zaldy Co were dispersed among the following DEO’s in 2023 and 2024: Tarlac First Engineering District, Tarlac Second District Office, Pampanga Third District Office, and Bulacan Second District Office. What happened with these allocations will of course be revealed only after DPWH internal investigations and COA fraud audits very soon.
The Bulacan First DEO promoted DE Henry Alcantara to his post in 2019. He admitted leading this syndicated operations and tagged boss of the (Bulacan Group of Contractors) BGC boys. In the Senate, Alcantara addresses DPWH Usec Roberto Bernardo as his boss from way back. Bernardo had been with Alcantara from Laguna to the City of Manila Engineering office and finally to Bulacan.
In their sworn affidavits before the Senate a lot of big names were mentioned, Alcantara revealed the involvement of former senator Ramon ‘Bong’ Revilla Jr., Senator Jinggoy Estrada, Senator Joel Villanueva, Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Zaldy Co, former Caloocan Rep. Mitch Cajayon-Uy and Ferdstar Builders Contractors.
Meanwhile Former DPWH Usec Roberto Bernardo tagged Senator Chiz Escudero and his friend businessman Maynard Ngu, former Senators Ramon Bong Revilla, Nancy Binay, COA Commissioner Mario Lipaña, DEPEd Usec Trygive Olaivar while citing conversations and deliveries of money from Alcantara to Congressman Zaldy Co. Also in his affidavit, Bernardo revealed he was consulting then DPWH sec. Manny Bonoan regarding the release of funds for SP Escudero.
Hernandez mentioned new names of involved politicians when he was summoned by the Independent Committee on Infrastructure. His lawyer, Atty Raymond Fortun went public that six more senators will be implicated, however his client Brice Hernandez denied this in a Senate hearing. We expect more fireworks in the coming days.
But there are other important questions waiting for answers.Alcantara assumed office as DEO in 2019, when former President Duterte was in office, what happened? Considering the clear connection between Usec Bernardo and Alcantara, might it be inferred that Mark Villar, the current senator and former secretary of the DPWH, was also privy to the operation they were running? Who are the 2019-2022, 2020-2021, and 2022 Duterte officials or politicians who funded flood control projects of Alcantara and Bernardo ? Which contractors are involved in this projects? Which politicians were behind the 2019 and beyond Senate/House budget insertions, the Unprogrammed Funds, and the National Expenditure Program?
It is my belief that the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee should continue to focus on this ‘organized plunder’ in Bulacan and how these phantom flood control projects are created from the DPWH, the DBM, the House of Representatives, the Senate and the Bicameral conference committee.
What is the true story here?
We want to know the other Senators, Congressmen, Undersecretaries, senior government officials and contractors who benefitted from this Bulacan ghost flood project factory. The Filipino people have a right to know the whole truth-no embellishments-because they have been deeply hurt. (next)
Don’t Lock the People Out: ICI’s Closed Sessions Betray the Public Trust
The Independent Commission for Infrastructure’s decision to hold closed-door hearings into the Bulacan flood-control scandal is not merely disappointing; it is a dangerous abdication of the public’s right to know. The COA has exposed a gargantuan pattern of alleged theft and organized plunder in Bulacan. In response, the ICI should be inviting the public in, not shutting them out behind a bureaucratic curtain.
The ICI’s stated fear – that public proceedings might become a ‘trial by publicity’ – is both overstated and self-defeating. Transparency is not the enemy of fair process; secrecy is. When a new commission with limited powers refuses public scrutiny while investigating allegations that implicate powerful officials, it fuels the very suspicions it claims to dispel. If the ICI lacks confidence , the correct remedy is to tighten those procedures, not to keep citizens in the dark.
The ICI should commit to making its hearings public and accessible – but with safeguards designed to protect the integrity of testimony and the safety of witnesses. While we agree to disallow live streaming or broadcasting, they must publish verbatim transcripts and ‘completely verified’ exhibits within 24 hours of every session.
At the end of every hearing, the commission should hold a same day public press briefing summarizing what was covered, clarifying the status of unverified claims, and identifying next steps. This prevents misinformation from filling the vacuum.
These measures strike the balance the public demands: openness that prevents secrecy-driven impunity, and safeguards that protect fair process and personal safety. There is a larger point here. The Bulacan revelations triggered public outrage for a reason: ordinary Filipinos see their taxes turned into a slush fund for unscrupulous operators while their communities remain exposed to danger from shoddy or phantom flood-control work. The ICI’s legitimacy depends on how visibly and resolutely it counters that perception. Secrecy will only deepen mistrust and ignite street protests; visibility, combined with discipline, will build credibility.
Finally, let me be blunt: in a republic, public hearings are not a courtesy to the press; they are a safeguard for the citizenry. The people do not merely have an interest in these proceedings – they have a right to observe them. The ICI must open its doors, adopt robust safeguards against abuse, and show the nation that its investigations are about accountability, not cover-up. Anything less is a betrayal of the public trust and the promise of reform. If the commission refuses, it will invite one of two outcomes: either the very real danger of politicized spectacle, or the far worse danger of a quiet, bureaucratic burial of evidence. Neither is acceptable.