MANILA, Philippines — A flood-control project in Bulacan worth more than ₱77 million was officially declared 100% complete in 2025. But when authorities later inspected the site, the riverbank protection structure was allegedly nowhere to be found.
That finding is now at the center of fresh malversation and graft cases filed before the Sandiganbayan against former Ako Bicol party-list representative Elizaldy “Zaldy” Co, several former Department of Public Works and Highways officials, and two members of Co’s staff.
Project declared finished — but allegedly did not exist
The case involves the construction of a riverbank protection structure along the Balagtas River in Purok 4, Barangay San Juan, Balagtas, Bulacan.
The project was awarded to SYMS Construction Trading, with a revised contract amount of approximately ₱77.2 million. Government records cited by the Ombudsman showed that work was supposed to have begun on February 24, 2025, before the project was declared 100% accomplished on May 2, 2025.
A subsequent physical inspection, however, produced a dramatically different finding: according to the Ombudsman, the structure was non-existent.
The discrepancy between the accomplishment documents and what investigators allegedly found on the ground has become a key part of the prosecution’s case.
Who was charged?
According to the case information reported by the Philippine Daily Inquirer, the Ombudsman filed one count involving malversation of public funds through falsification of public documents and a graft case under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act against Co and former DPWH officials Brice Hernandez, Arjay Salvador Domasig, Jaypee De Leon Mendoza, Niño Lawrence Vergara Morales, Juanito Coronel Mendoza, Floralyn Yutuc Simbulan and Christina Mae Del Rosario Pineda.
Co staff members John Paul Estrada and Mark Tecsay were likewise included in the indictment.
One detail requires careful distinction: former Bulacan district engineer Henry Alcantara was among those covered by the Ombudsman’s probable-cause findings, but GMA News reported that he was not included in the information filed in court because he had been admitted to the government’s Witness Protection Program.
Ombudsman alleges payments continued despite warning signs
The Ombudsman said investigators found repeated approvals of payments to SYMS despite what it described as significant irregularities in documents such as Monthly Certificates of Payment and Statements of Work Accomplished.
Investigators said those repeated approvals supported their allegation that government funds intended for flood protection were improperly diverted.
The Ombudsman further alleged that Alcantara collected kickbacks from contractors and delivered money to Co in advance, while Co allegedly helped ensure that projects were inserted into the National Expenditure Program and ultimately funded through the General Appropriations Act. These remain prosecution allegations that must be proven in court.
The anti-graft body said the pattern of approvals, inspections and certifications could not simply be dismissed as isolated administrative errors, alleging that officials repeatedly failed to exercise the level of scrutiny required of them.
Not every allegation resulted in a charge
There was also a partial dismissal.
The Ombudsman dismissed for lack of probable cause a separate complaint under Section 3(b) of Republic Act No. 3019 against Co, Alcantara, Estrada and Tecsay. Philstar also reported that a separate perjury matter involving SYMS owner Sally Santos was referred to the Department of Justice for appropriate action.
Philstar reported that the malversation case was raffled to the Sandiganbayan Fourth Division, while the graft case went to the Fifth Division.
Why this case is bigger than one ₱77-million project
The Balagtas case comes amid a much wider government investigation into allegedly anomalous flood-control spending in Bulacan.
In September 2025, the Commission on Audit reported findings involving almost ₱390 million worth of separate alleged “ghost” flood-control projects in the province. Those cases included projects in Plaridel, Pandi and Bocaue and resulted in audit findings being forwarded to the Ombudsman.
In January 2026, COA announced another batch of fraud-audit findings involving more than ₱325 million in separate Bulacan flood-control projects. State auditors said their inspections involved physical site checks, drone surveillance, geotagged photographs and historical satellite imagery. COA cited alleged ghost projects, relocated project sites, payments involving pre-existing structures and documentation deficiencies.
Those projects are separate from the ₱77.2-million Balagtas case, but they demonstrate why flood-control spending in Bulacan has remained under intense investigative scrutiny.
Co already faces another flood-control case
The latest Bulacan prosecution is also not Co’s first Sandiganbayan case involving flood-control spending.
In November 2025, prosecutors charged him in connection with a roughly ₱289.4-million project in Naujan, Oriental Mindoro that authorities alleged suffered from serious structural deficiencies.
The Inquirer reported that the Sandiganbayan had subsequently declared Co a fugitive from justice in connection with that earlier case. News5 reported that Co has maintained his innocence regarding the allegations against him.
As with the latest Bulacan charges, the filing of cases and a finding of probable cause do not constitute a conviction. Criminal liability will ultimately have to be established before the courts.
The question investigators now have to answer
The most striking part of the Balagtas case is therefore not merely its ₱77.2-million price tag.
It is the paper trail.
A government-funded flood-control structure was allegedly documented, inspected through official processes, certified as fully accomplished and tied to payment approvals — yet investigators say that when the project was physically checked, the promised structure did not exist.
That leaves a much bigger question at the heart of the prosecution:
How could a multimillion-peso government project reach 100% completion on paper if investigators say there was effectively nothing there to complete?
Leave a Reply