More than a year before the alleged rigging in the bidding of the World Bank-funded $33 million National Road Improvement and Management Program erupted into a full-blown controversy, there were already moves by some senators to investigate the anomaly. In fact, the committee on economic affairs, then chaired by Senator Loren Legarda, started the inquiry but was able to conduct only one public hearing, which was held on Nov. 26, 2007. Of the officials from several agencies invited to the hearing, only one—a representative from the Commission on Audit—showed up.

The probe was put in the backburner and the scandal was forgotten until it resurfaced this month when the newspapers banner-headlined the official findings of the WB Group Sanctions Board. This prompted the Senate to reopen the investigation. It fell upon the shoulders of Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago, the new chairman of the committee on economic affairs, to pursue the inquiry. But her assumption of this task was not without drama and suspense. Last Monday, an enraged Santiago took the floor to denounce a purported maneuvering by her colleagues to ease her out of the probe by reassigning it to the Blue Ribbon committee.

With Senator Panfilo Lacson taking the first crack at asking questions, he zeroed in on the alleged existence of a cartel of construction firms cornering juicy public contracts. His intention was to back the Bank’s conclusion that such cartel was engaged in collusive and fraudulent practices in the bidding process. Lacson grilled Eduardo de Luna of the E.C. De Luna Construction Corp., on his alleged closeness with First Gentleman Juan Miguel Arroyo, that supposedly helped his firm in bagging big infrastructure contracts from the Public Works Department. E.C. de Luna Construction, together with the Cavite Ideal Construction and the CM Pancho Construction, was blacklisted by the World Bank for alleged malpractices.

The senator from Cavite narrated how De Luna supposedly delivered P70 million in cash to the First Gentleman at the LTA Building in Makati City sometime in 2004, allegedly in exchange for a P1.4-billion contract for the rehabilitation of Edsa awarded to the cartel. He claimed that he had an eyewitness who knew about De Luna’s connection with the presidential spouse but the contractor denied these allegations. The problem is that Lacson is unsure whether his witness is willing to come forward and testify. He admitted that the witness is too afraid to take the risks.

Unfortunately, De Luna and Lamberto Lee of the Cavite Ideal Construction were not given the opportunity to present their sides of the road project mess. Even Ebdane was not able to read his prepared statement. He received a tongue-lashing from Santiago when he said, in reply to her query, that they have not yet identified the DPWH officials who allegedly colluded with the cartel.

But at Wednesday’s hearing of the House of Representatives on the same issue, Ebdane’s deputy, Public Works Undersecretary Manuel Bonoan testified that E.C. de Luna, Cavite Ideal and CM Pancho were “the most reliable contractors in the country.” His statement was a virtual clearance of the three construction firms from the alleged scam.

“We cannot fathom the thinking of the Bank in this process. We have no reason to believe there was collusion,” Bonoan told the House committee on public works and highways.

For his part, De Luna said that while he had participated in the bidding of some WB-funded road projects, his construction firm ended up being defeated or disqualified except only in this specific project, which it won but was deprived of the award. His firm did not receive a single centavo for the project costing P900 million in peso equivalent.

In his defense, De Luna said the conclusion of the WB Sanctions Board was based on e-mail messages of anonymous and unverified persons “with an obvious ax to grind,” clearly referring to disgruntled rival contractors who were defeated in the bidding. Which means, he says, that he was condemned on the basis of what legal experts would call “multiple hearsay.”

Moreover, according to a memorandum sent by De Luna’s lawyers to the WB, the Senate and House, not one of the 50 local and foreign participating contractors ever declared that he colluded with them in any attempt to defraud the bank. Also, the memorandum stated, not one of the 13 winning contractors involved in the project under question ever declared that they sought assistance in order to win the contract.

De Luna’s lawyer, Nasser Marahomsalic also protested that the WB Sanctions Board, even “without conducting any hearing, affirmed the findings of collusion and respondents’ imputed role as ringleaders but found no sufficient evidence that, more likely than not, they have engaged in fraudulent acts.”

A confidential copy of the WB’s decision furnished this journalist admitted that “the Sanctions Board concluded that INT had not presented evidence sufficient to establish that it was more likely than not these respondents had engaged in corrupt practices.” In view of this fact, De Luna and his lawyers argued that “the penalty of indefinite debarment is grossly inconsistent with the findings in its decision and applicable guidelines in the Bank’s own sanctions procedures.”

f_maragay@yahoo.com