I believe that it is about time that legislators should steer clear of participating in infrastructure projects in our country. When lawmakers are involved in infrastructure projects, it creates a conflict of interest. They are making decisions that could benefit their own businesses or interests, which can lead to corruption and unfair practices — now the current hot issue after uncovering several ghost flood control projects under the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).
This can result in subpar projects that waste public funds and do not serve the best interests of the people. More importantly, the involvement of legislators in infrastructure projects can undermine the checks and balances in government. It is the job of the legislative branch to oversee and regulate the executive branch’s implementation of projects, not to participate in them. In doing so, the legislature has blurred the lines of separation of powers.
Legislators should focus on what they are primarily elected to do — craft, deliberate and enact laws for the common good. When they spend their time and energy seeking funds for infrastructure projects in their districts, they blur the lines between the legislative and executive branches. This also diverts attention from their main responsibility and fosters a system where politics and patronage take precedence over policy and principle.
The role of legislators is to craft laws that ensure fairness, accountability and national progress, while infrastructure projects fall under the mandate of the executive branch through its implementing agencies. The involvement of lawmakers in funding or managing such projects has led to inefficiency, ghost projects, and corruption.
The culprit behind the current corruption problem, if I may say, was the infamous “pork barrel” system, a stark reminder of how this overlap can be abused, turning public funds into tools for political gain rather than instruments of development.
To recall, in 1989, special development funds were created for the Visayas and Mindanao regions, supposedly to address perceived budget imbalances, with an initial allocation of P2.3 billion for projects identified by legislators across the country.
In 1990, the Countryside Development Fund (CDF) was established, expanding the fund to include legislators from Luzon and all over the country. It was designed to allow legislators to fund small-scale infrastructure and community projects that fell outside the scope of the national infrastructure program, which pertains to large infrastructure items.
The CDF was then renamed the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) and continued to be a source of funds for legislators. Commonly called the “pork barrel,” it was the subject of much public outrage following Commission on Audit special reports citing gross misuse of lawmakers’ funds in 1996 and 2013.
From the Commission on Audit report, the Department of Justice filed plunder charges against several lawmakers alleged to be involved in the PDAF scam that was said to be masterminded by businesswoman Janet Lim Napoles. Recently, however, the Sandiganbayan acquitted Napoles, then-Senator Juan Ponce Enrile, and his staff of the charges.
When the constitutionality and legality of PDAF were challenged by losing senatorial bets Greco Belgica and Samson Alcantara before the Supreme Court (SC) on Nov. 19, 2013, the SC en banc declared the PDAF unconstitutional and caused its abolition.
What followed the abolition of the “pork barrel” masquerading as PDAF were the “insertions” by members of Congress that are supposedly legitimate amendments to the proposed National Expenditure Program to add or change programs and projects that allow legislators to address local needs.
But the recent uncovering of ghost DPWH flood mitigation projects and recently ghost farm-to-market roads highlighted that the size (in billions) and lack of transparency of these insertions appear to reflect insufficient due diligence and political considerations. The process involves the executive branch proposing a budget, which Congress then amends, realigns, or adds to during hearings and deliberations before the final General Appropriations Act is passed.
By limiting their work to lawmaking, legislators can strengthen checks and balances in government. They can focus on crafting policies that ensure equitable distribution of resources, promote transparency in infrastructure development and empower local governments to plan and implement projects according to their communities’ needs. This clear separation of powers not only prevents misuse of public funds but also upholds the integrity of governance.
In short, lawmakers should write the rules, not run the projects. When they remain true to their constitutional role, they help build a more accountable, effective, and principled government that truly serves the people. With this, public trust could be restored after billions of public funds were lost in scam projects that are now the subject of a Senate inquiry and investigation conducted by the Independent Commission for Infrastructure.
Perhaps when Gov. Pam Baricuatro criticized as “ridiculous” the plan of 5th District Rep. Duke Frasco to build another airport somewhere in the northern town of Sogod, what she had in mind was for the congressman to leave this to the national executive department, especially given that there are still ongoing investigations into several ghost projects under the DPWH.