C𝗲𝗻𝗣𝗘𝗚 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗻 𝗕𝘂𝗱𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗔𝗻𝘁𝗶-𝗖𝗼𝗿𝗿𝘂𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗥𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱 𝗦𝗢𝗡𝗔

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.'s declaration in his 2025 State of the Nation Address (SONA) to scrutinize and publicize all flood control projects—by requiring regional offices to submit these to the Office of the President and directing the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) to analyze and publish them-- is a long-overdue step toward budget transparency. However, such internal review mechanisms, while welcome, remain insufficient.

Historically, the flood control budget has been riddled with corruption, political patronage, and manipulation – especially during election cycles. The mere publication of flood control projects, although a gesture toward transparency, lacks the participatory oversight and institutional power required to dismantle entrenched corrupt practices.

In response, the Center for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG) proposes the following concrete measures;

𝟭. 𝗘𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝗮 𝗣𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲’𝘀 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗲 (𝗣𝗔𝗖)

We urge the President to convene a People’s Audit Committee composed of independent civil society groups, people’s organizations, engineers, community leaders, and anti-corruption watchdogs. Crucially, this must go beyond symbolic consultation and be legally empowered to:

• Summon government officials and private contractors for questioning;

• Subpoena documents related to public infrastructure and flood control projects;

• Conduct independent site inspections and community consultations;

• Publish regular audit findings and make periodic reports directly to the Office of the President and to the public.

𝟮. 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗔𝗖 𝗧𝗵𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵 𝗘𝘅𝗲𝗰𝘂𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗼𝗿 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗶𝘀𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗔𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻

To ensure sustainability and authority, the PAC must be institutionalized either through an executive order or enabling legislation. This body should have a dedicated budget and formal access to agencies such as the DPWH, NEDA, COA, and the DBM. Only with institutional backing can the PAC operate with consistency and credibility.

𝟯. 𝗔𝗻𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗿 Oversight 𝗶𝗻 𝗟𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆

Communities on the frontlines of flooding- and who bear the brunt of poorly-executed or ghost infrastructure projects—must be central to the audit process. Local organizations and residents possess vital knowledge to detect anomalies such as overpriced contracts, redundant projects, or non-existent infrastructure.

In conclusion, while the President’s directive for greater transparency in flood projects is a step in the right direction, it must be followed by deeper reforms that institutionalize participatory, empowered and independent oversight. Without genuine mechanisms to involve the people and hold public officials accountable, this initiative risks becoming yet another superficial transparency measure that fails to confront the roots of corruption.