‘The ICI’s challenge is not to prove Magalong right or wrong, but to prove itself worthy of the people’s trust.’
THE resignation of Baguio City Mayor Benjamin Magalong as special adviser to the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) has been met with regret from Malacañang and disappointment from some of his supporters.
But the real lesson in this episode is not about one man’s standing. It is about how fragile public trust becomes when conflict of interest and constitutional boundaries are ignored.
Magalong’s appointment was always unusual. He was named as a special adviser, not a full-blown, full-time investigator.
The distinction matters. His mandate was to lend credibility and counsel to a new commission tasked with probing anomalies in multibillion-peso flood-control and infrastructure projects. Yet from the start, the credibility question was never fully resolved.
He chose to retain his seat as mayor, despite constitutional prohibitions on local officials holding another government post. That refusal undercut the very independence he was supposed to reinforce.
The controversy came to a head with revelations about a P110-million tennis court and parking structure in Baguio, awarded to the Discaya couple’s construction firm. The Discayas are under ICI investigation for flood-control contracts elsewhere. That overlap casts doubt on Magalong’s ability to serve without bias.
When the Palace announced it would review his appointment, he resigned, claiming his role had been undermined and the ICI’s independence compromised.
His departure may look like a principled exit, but it also exposes a deeper weakness. Integrity cannot be left to the discretion of personalities. It must be built into the structure of our institutions. The ICI was designed to probe a decade of ghost projects, substandard works, and kickbacks. That mission is too important to be swallowed by political drama.
The real test now is whether the commission can insulate itself from politics, guard against future conflicts of interest, and protect those who come forward with testimony. Whistleblower protection is not a side issue; it is the heart of any credible inquiry. If contractors, engineers, or public officials fear retaliation, the truth will never surface.
Malacañang insists that the ICI’s mandate is larger than any one individual. On this, we agree. But words are not enough.
What will restore confidence is the commission’s ability to proceed transparently: opening its processes to public scrutiny, publishing its findings, and showing that no name is too big, and no connection too close, to escape accountability.
Resignations may seize the headlines. Reforms, however, are forged in rules, safeguards, and transparency. The ICI’s challenge is not to prove Magalong right or wrong, but to prove itself worthy of the people’s trust.
