Why closed doors? Calls mounting for ICI to make corruption hearings public

MANILA, Philippines — Should the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) make its hearings public, just like congressional probes? Some lawmakers and civil society groups argue that doing so is crucial to ensuring transparency and accountability.

“With all due respect, the decision of the ICI to prevent the public from monitoring its proceedings online is ill-advised. Please open your proceedings to the public,” Sen. Kiko Pangilinan said in a Facebook post on Monday, September 29. 

Rep. Leila de Lima (ML Party-list) also expressed disappointment, saying the commission already has limited powers and functions as a “recommendatory board” with no ability to cite resource persons in contempt. 

For the ICI to keep the hearings private, she said the commission is only “depriving” what the public wants.  

“Paano mapapanatag ang mga Pilipino na walang pinagtatakpan at walang pinoprotektahan ang imbestigasyon nila?” De Lima asked. (How can Filipinos be assured that the investigation is not covering up or protecting anyone?)

The ICI has begun holding hearings, but without public or media access. Resource persons like Sen. Joel Villanueva, Sen. Chiz Escudero and former Sen. Grace Poe have already visited the ICI.

'Avoid trial by publicity'

ICI Executive Director Brian Hosaka so far has stood by the decision to keep the hearings closed, saying it is necessary to “avoid a trial by publicity.”

“We don’t want the commission to be used for any political agenda or leverage kaya nag-iingat po kami,” he said in an ambush interview, stressing it is crucial to maintain the commission’s integrity. 

For Hosaka, who was only appointed only on September 24, the hearings could be exploited to influence public opinion even when the testimony or evidence shared by a resource person has yet to be verified by the commission and appropriate agencies.

But De Lima argued that if the ICI fears a “trial by publicity,” does this mean the commission is not confident enough to handle the investigation? 

“Para manggaling pa mismo sa ICI na baka maging trial by publicity ito, wala ba silang tiwala sa paghandle nila ng imbestigasyon? ‘Di ko gets,” she said in a statement on Monday. (For the ICI itself to say this might turn into a trial by publicity — doesn’t that mean they don’t trust their own handling of the investigation? I don’t get it.)

‘People are watching’

Before the commission began its fact-finding and recommendatory work, both the House and Senate had launched separate inquiries into anomalous flood control projects.

All hearings were streamed live on Facebook and YouTube, drawing thousands of viewers and public commentaries on social media. 

The public not only heard testimonies of resource persons and saw evidence presented by lawmakers, but also witnessed how investigators interacted with witnesses.

These resource persons included officials who admitted to corruption in the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and implicated members of Congress.

“People are watching. Sa mga hearing na ito, hindi lang sa mga akusado nakatutok ang taumbayan, kundi pati na rin sa mga nag-iimbestiga — kung tapat at epektibo ba nilang nagagampanan ang kanilang tungkulin,” De Lima said. (In these hearings, the public is not only focused on the accused but also on the investigators — on whether they are carrying out their duties with honesty and effectiveness.)

Following the hearings and revelations that lawmakers and public officials allegedly pocketed millions to billions from flood control projects, several protests and mass demonstrations were staged in September to demand justice over the corruption scandal.

Pangilinan warned that if the ICI keeps its hearings private, commission members could one day find protesters rallying outside their homes. 

“Do not test the people’s desire to know the truth,” he added, urging the commission to reconsider its decision.  

What can the ICI do? 

If the ICI refuses to livestream its hearings, Rep. Terry Ridon (Bicol Saro Party-list) suggested that it should allow the public to attend, similar to court proceedings.

He told Philstar.com in a message that the commission could opt to go into executive sessions “if warranted by national security, state secrets or any sensitive matter approved upon by the ICI.” 

Ridon added that, at the very least, the commission should hold “end-of-day briefings” on its proceedings, especially when sessions are held in private. This, he said, would allow media coverage, livestreaming and greater transparency to the public.

Meanwhile, Hosaka insisted that evidence and documents will still be made public once verified, after which the ICI will endorse them to the proper agency, such as the Ombudsman. 

He explained that this approach ensures the Ombudsman will not easily dismiss any recommendation to file charges, since such dismissal would mean the commission failed to do its job.

Hosaka also asked the public for patience, saying the commission still lacks support staff and is prioritizing internal organization to ensure it has enough manpower to carry out the investigations.

The ICI has been working with the Department of Justice, Commission on Audit, DPWH and other agencies to gather affidavits from confessing officials, audit reports on public works projects, and prepare potential charges. It has also been conducting field inspections nationwide, uncovering more substandard and ghost projects.