What other powers should the ICI have? Congress starts deliberations

MANILA, Philippines — As lawmakers move to broaden the powers of the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) as an investigative body, the Office of the Ombudsman also recommended granting it authority to file complaints directly before the agency, rather than merely issuing recommendations. 

At the House Government Reorganization Committee's hearing on Tuesday, November 11, Assistant Ombudsman Asryman Rafanan laid out the agency's position concerning the two bills filed seeking to strengthen the ICI as the Independent Commission Against Infrastructure Corruption (ICAIC). 

Under House Bills 4453 and 5699, the ICI would be expanded into the Independent Commission Against Infrastructure Corruption (ICAIC) and given the power to cite resource persons in contempt, a move seen as a crucial complement to its ability to compel attendance and cooperation.

Rafanan said the Office of the Ombudsman supports the measure, noting its "limited resource personnel" amid numerous investigations, including those on flood control projects.

So far, the ICI has only been able to recommend the filing of cases against contractors and Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) officials — adding another layer before the Ombudsman can begin a formal investigation.

"This will help in speedily processing the cases and subject matters of investigation if the commission is empowered as well to draft the complaint or to directly file and not just recommend," Rafanan told the panel.

He added that if an investigator from the independent commission is also authorized to represent the body in the same resolution report, they can immediately serve as the nominal complainant, which would then be subject to the Ombudsman's evaluation.

Should it be complete in form and substance, the complaint will go straight to preliminary investigation, administrative adjudication or forfeiture proceedings, Rafanan said. 

The Office of the Ombudsman, however, raised a reservation over Section 6 of House Bill 4453, which defines the ICAIC’s investigative scope. The provision designates the commission as the central body for probing all complaints involving corruption in infrastructure projects.

Under the bill, all such complaints would be referred to the ICAIC "to avoid duplication of investigations," subject to an agreement between the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice.

Rafanan, however, said this "poses operational challenges" as it could "further delay" cases already under investigation by the Office of the Ombudsman.

"It might also raise confidentiality concerns when it comes to the results of pending investigations that the Ombudsman already has in possession," he added. 

ICI's suggestions

Meanwhile, the ICI also outlined its recommendations in support of the proposed measures. ICI Executive Director Brian Hosaka said the commission is seeking additional powers apart from what has been listed in the filed bills.

First, it wants the authority to revoke the registration of establishments found responsible for anomalous infrastructure projects.

Second, it seeks the power to directly recommend to the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) the automatic cancellation of licenses of officials found liable for substandard or ghost projects, such as DPWH engineers leading regional offices.

This would help streamline the process by reducing the need to refer or file separate cases with other agencies.  

Hosaka also said the commission proposed including a transitory clause in the bill to ensure the continuity of its ongoing investigations and secure the tenure of current employees who would be absorbed into the newly established ICAIC if the measure is enacted.

On top of that, he said the ICI recommends that the body be exempted from criminal and civil liability. In other words, "no criminal or civil action shall lie against the commission or any member thereof for acts done or omitted in the discharge of its mandate unther this act," Hosaka said. 

However, he said that the Supreme Court should still have the power to issue any restraining orders or injunctions against the independent body. 

Rep. Paolo Henry Marcoleta (SAGIP Party-list) suggested that the Office of the President could issue another executive order to strengthen the ICI’s powers while Congress continues to deliberate on the bill.

Hosaka, however, said it would depend on the president’s discretion and the legal feasibility of such a move. He added that, as far as he knows, expanding the ICI’s powers is a matter of legislative policy determination.

Despite it not being one of the president's priority bills, Congress is moving to fast-track the measure, as pledged by House Speaker Bojie Dy, to ensure that investigations into the flood control corruption scandal proceed more swiftly and are taken seriously, especially by public officials.