LEYTE Rep. Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez has not been linked by any evidence to alleged anomalous flood control projects, his spokesperson said Thursday, arguing that the accusations are inconsistent with how the national budget process operates.
In a statement, Atty. Elaine A. Atienza said that despite Senate and House inquiries and other official investigations, no former or incumbent official of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) has identified Romualdez as having participated in the planning, procurement, implementation, inspection, payment or release of funds for any alleged ghost flood control project.
She added that even former DPWH Secretary Manuel Bonoan, who had firsthand knowledge of the department’s operations, never implicated the Leyte lawmaker.
“Simple lang kung bakit — because Rep. Romualdez was not involved,” Atienza said.
She said the allegations fail to reflect how the national budget is crafted and implemented.
“The issue traces back to the national budget process. Sa prosesong iyan — no single person—not even the Speaker of the House—can control,” she said.
Atienza explained that the National Expenditure Program is prepared by the Executive branch through the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and implementing agencies, including the DPWH, before it is submitted to Congress for deliberation by both the House of Representatives and the Senate.
“No Speaker can dictate upon Cabinet secretaries. Neither can he dictate upon senators, who exercise their own independent constitutional mandate. Sila po ay pantay-pantay diyan being elected officials. Primus inter pares,” Atienz said.
She stressed that once the budget becomes law, the Speaker has “absolutely no authority” over project bidding, contract awards, implementation, inspections, payments or the release of government funds.
“Hindi niya po saklaw ang pagpapa-release ng budget. Those are functions vested by law in the Executive Branch,” Atienza said.
She added: “Hindi kayang utusan ng Speaker ang DPWH Secretary. Hindi niya kayang diktahan ang DBM o ang Senado. At lalong hindi siya ang nagpa-plano ng proyekto, nagpapa-bid, nag-a-award ng kontrata, nag-iinspeksyon, o naglalabas ng pondo.”
According to Atienza, insisting that Romualdez was the alleged “mastermind” would require the public to believe that one person controlled every stage of the budget and infrastructure process.
“Ang gustong palabasin ng iba, parang iisang tao ang may hawak ng buong gobyerno. Hindi po ganoon ang ating Konstitusyon,” Atienza said.
Atienza maintained that accountability should rest on those who exercised legal and operational authority over the projects.
“If there were irregularities in any infrastructure project, then those who actually exercised legal and operational authority should be identified and held accountable. Accountability must follow the evidence—not political convenience,” Atienza said.
“Kung may nagkasala, papanagutin natin. Pero huwag nating gawing shortcut ang paghahanap ng isang malaking pangalan para lang may maipakita sa publiko,” Atienza said.
Atienza said Romualdez was being portrayed as a “convenient excuse and political scapegoat” despite the absence of evidence linking him to the alleged anomalous projects.
“At the end of the day, justice demands only one standard,” Atienza said.
“Sa paghahanap ng hustisya, hindi puwedeng mauna ang akusasyon bago ang ebidensya. Sa batas, ang ebidensya ang nagtuturo kung sino ang mananagot,” said Atienza. (END)
