SC Rejects TRO on “Flood Control” Report, Intensifies Kleptocracy Scrutiny

SC Rejects TRO on “Flood Control” Report, Intensifies Kleptocracy Scrutiny

By Bing Jabadan – TheNATIONWEEK.com | May 15, 2026

MANILA, Philippines – The Supreme Court did not issue a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) sought by a group of lawyers to compel the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee to release the unredacted draft report of its investigation into multi-billion-peso anomalous flood control projects.

This decision, while not a definitive ruling on the merits, escalates a critical battle for transparency and public information in the Philippines, a nation frequently facing allegations of kleptocracy and kakistocracy.

The petitioners—lawyers Eldridge Marvin Aceron, Sikini Labastilla, and Purificacion Bartolome-Bernabe—previously requested that the high court issue a temporary restraining order and/or a status quo ante order directing the SBRC to preserve and refrain from destroying, altering, concealing, or revising all versions of the draft partial committee report on the investigation of flood control projects, specifically including the version bearing the original signatures of Senators Juan Miguel F. Zubiri, Joseph Victor G. Ejercito, and Sherwin T. Gatchalian, pending full resolution.

Instead of a TRO, the High Court, in a resolution dated April 29 and released on May 15, 2026, directed the Senate Blue Ribbon panel, formerly chaired by Senator Ping Lacson, to comment within 15 days on the petition.

The Senate panel previously withheld the original draft, citing “deliberative process privilege” to prevent a “chilling effect” on internal governmental discussions. However, petitioners contend this privilege was waived by Senator Lacson’s public disclosures.

For over three weeks, the then-chairman reportedly confirmed that the draft recommended plunder and other charges against senators based on evidence from the hearings. “Chairman Lacson, as the institutional holder of the deliberative process privilege, cannot now invoke it against petitioners after publicly disclosing the substance of the privileged material,” the petition asserts. “He is not a rogue subordinate but the chairman empowered to decide committee disclosures. When the privilege-holder chooses to disclose, the privilege is surrendered, not stolen.”

The petitioners underscore the 1987 Constitution’s guarantee of the people’s right to information on matters of public concern. “The right to information is not a gift from the state to the citizen; it is a guarantee the citizen holds against the state,” they declared, urging the Supreme Court to enforce this fundamental right.

Beyond the TRO, petitioners seek a writ of mandamus, compelling the Blue Ribbon Committee to release the full, unredacted draft report as it existed on or about February 3 and 4, 2026. This demand reflects a deep public hunger for accountability, particularly in a nation grappling with persistent government corruption and inefficiency. The Supreme Court’s ultimate decision on this writ will be a pivotal moment in the ongoing fight for transparency and genuine good governance.