THE mayor of Dumanjug, Cebu, has opened all municipal documents and infrastructure sites to investigation after a former legislator claimed the province received the largest share of P100 billion in alleged budget insertions, some supposedly went to top officials.
The call for transparency followed a second video by former Ako Bicol Party-list representative Elizaldy “Zaldy” Co, who alleged that President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. personally received P25 billion in kickbacks from the 2025 national budget’s so-called “secret insertions” during bicameral conference committee (bicam) deliberations. Co claimed he and his aides delivered suitcases of money to the residences of Marcos and former House Speaker Martin Romualdez.
Marcos and Romualdez denied the claims. Malacañang dismissed them as “pure hearsay,” while Romualdez said Co’s allegations were not made under oath and carry “no weight in a court of law.” Budget Secretary Mina Pangandaman emphasized that all appropriations follow proper procedures, noting that funds are reflected in the National Expenditure Program (NEP).
Representative Leila de Lima questioned Co’s credibility and timing, urging him to return to the Philippines to testify under oath, warning that anything less could raise doubts about his motives.
Dumanjug’s response
Mayor Gungun Gica of Dumanjug welcomed independent audits, emphasizing transparency. “Transparency is our best protection, and Dumanjug is ready to open all documents, inspection reports, and project sites,” he said on Facebook. The mayor also requested a comprehensive inventory of all DPWH flood control and infrastructure projects in the municipality.
Based on Co’s list, Cebu stands out with around P7.58 billion in allocations, the widest and densest project spread among the provinces flagged.
Dumanjug appears at the top of the list with P3.23 billion across 18 projects, ranging from major road links to tourism corridors. Amid the growing national conversation, Gica underscored that Dumanjug welcomes full scrutiny.
Gica also highlighted Dumanjug’s recent disaster performance, noting that the town recorded zero casualties and minimal damage during Typhoon Tino. “We remain committed to strengthening mitigation measures for our people.”
When insertions happen
The national budget begins with the Executive submitting the NEP, followed by congressional and Senate review. The bicameral conference committee reconciles differences between the two chambers. Co’s allegations focus on last-minute insertions during this stage. While legal, such insertions often face criticism for lacking transparency and for favoring specific districts. Corruption through infrastructure kickbacks has long been a point of concern in Philippine politics.
Co claimed Cebu received P7.58 billion, with Dumanjug getting P3.23 billion. Of the P100 billion he alleged, about P7.27 billion cannot be validated through bidding documents or DPWH records, fueling public suspicion.
Implications of the scandal
The accusations highlight tensions between executive power, congressional oversight, and public accountability. If any part of the P100 billion was misused, it raises questions about the honest use of taxpayer funds. Regardless of truth, allegations involving the President and the former House Speaker erode public trust in the budget process.
The case also underscores challenges faced by whistleblowers. Co’s contested credibility—and the power of the officials he accuses—illustrates the difficulty of proving wrongdoing within high-level government operations.
Erosion of trust
Claims tying top leaders to kickbacks deepen public skepticism about government integrity. Even unproven, such allegations damage confidence in national institutions.
The larger issues
The controversy reflects enduring problems in political accountability, especially in discretionary budget insertions. It underscores the balance between allowing flexible budgeting and preventing corruption hidden within legislative procedures. It also highlights the importance, and vulnerability, of whistleblowers whose past actions can be used to cast doubt on their testimonies.
What’s next
Attention now turns to institutional responses. Co challenged the Ombudsman to investigate and called for a Senate inquiry, which could shift the issue from social media to formal proceedings. The Independent Commission on Infrastructure—created by Marcos to examine questionable spending—will be closely observed to determine whether it can deliver meaningful accountability or simply serve as political damage control.
The key question remains whether the allegations will trigger a sworn, verifiable investigation or remain unresolved in public debate, exposing the difficulty of enforcing accountability in the Philippine budget process.