What's taking gov't so long to verify Leviste's 'Cabral files'?

MANILA, Philippines — Nearly two weeks have passed since Rep. Leandro Leviste (Batangas, 1st District) went public with the alleged “Cabral files,” yet appropriate agencies seem to be taking their time verifying their authenticity. 

In a radio interview on Friday, January 2, human rights advocate and lawyer Erin Tañada questioned why the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) has been slow in cross-checking the list of projects Leviste claims is in the copy given to him, despite having official copies themselves.

The documents, which Leviste said he obtained on September 4 from former DPWH Undersecretary Maria Catalina Cabral, list names of lawmakers and executive officials who may have requested the agency for insertions through the 2025 national budget. 

According to Leviste, every member of Congress is given the opportunity to propose at least P150 million in budget insertions with the DPWH each year.  

While these allegations have fueled public perception of immediate corruption, Tañada said verifying the documents is necessary for transparency and for establishing the facts.

“The longer it takes, the more it makes people wonder why it’s taking so long. After all, this is just a list. The DPWH has official records. They could just say, ‘Oh, this is correct. Oh, this is wrong,’” he said over DZMM Teleradyo in a mix of English and Filipino.

The documents do not, by themselves, establish corruption, but only show which projects received funding and who may have proposed them, Tañada added.

“We’re not talking of corruption here. We’re just talking about the list of projects that were allocated to the different agencies, to the different offices, to the different congressional districts, to the different senators,” he said.  

Passing the ball

Since Leviste publicized these documents after Cabral’s death, agencies have only been pointing fingers at each other on who should initiate the verification. 

When Malacañang described his claims against executive officials as “hearsay,” Palace press officer Claire Castro said the burden of proof should be with Leviste. 

Meanwhile, Public Works Secretary Vince Dizon clarified that he had not authenticated any of the documents that Leviste has, since he has not seen them himself. He also said the congressman forcibly took other files from the computer of Cabral’s staff.

Leviste, however, claimed Dizon knew and gave him permission to get a copy of the list. He also said he did not force Cabral to provide him with the documents of alleged proponents. 

The Office of the Ombudsman, on the other hand, said Leviste had shared only portions of the alleged Cabral files. Since it has already taken custody of Cabral’s computer, Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano said the agency will conduct a forensic examination.

However, the Ombudsman has not responded to queries from reporters on whether they will compare the so-called “Cabral files” with documents it and the DPWH have in their possession.

So, who should take the lead in authenticating the documents? 

What the DPWH should do

Tañada, who also served as House deputy speaker under the Aquino administration, said that verifying the files should be the DPWH’s responsibility. The Ombudsman, he said, will “quietly do their own work” before filing any case, if deemed necessary.  

“It is the DPWH that has the ball if they really want to be transparent and say this list that Congressman Leviste is holding is totally different,” he added. 

Whether or not the document has some truth to it or that it was forcibly taken, Tañada said the copy in Leviste’s possession should not be outright dismissed but used as a reference or starting point for investigating the alleged budget insertions made by several public officials.

In doing so, he said the government should first check if the projects listed in the alleged Cabral files match those in the 2025 General Appropriations Act. 

Secondly, it should verify whether the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) funded these projects through the special allotment release orders (SARO), which evidently provides a clear paper trail.

Lastly, investigative bodies should determine whether the funded projects were poorly implemented or not carried out at all. This way, he said, there would be an established basis for looking into the involvement of alleged proponents. 

“If the DPWH wants to end this issue and have a single narrative — because they’re struggling over the narrative — they should release the official documents they have, based on what was submitted to Congress as part of the budget, what came out of the 2025 GAA and what the DBM, under the Office of the President, can even say,” Tanada said.  

After President Bongbong Marcos failed to deliver on his promise to arrest the “big fishes” before Christmas, and with his Independent Commission for Infrastructure down to a single commissioner, the public has now been left questioning the administration’s seriousness in pursuing anti-corruption efforts.