Senator Francis “Chiz” Escudero, freshly ousted as Senate Speaker and now under the harsh glare of controversy, has launched an aggressive counter-narrative amid allegations that his office played a role in the billion-peso flood control racket and budget insertions scandal.
In a fiery speech, Escudero accused former House Speaker Martin Romualdez of masterminding a coordinated demolition job, painting senators—including himself—as convenient scapegoats while shielding members of the House from scrutiny.
“Ginagawang panakip-butas at fall guy ang mga senador palayo sa Kamara at sa mga tunay na maysala,” Escudero declared, claiming Romualdez orchestrated a script designed to fracture alliances and protect his own political future.
Flood control scandal: Escudero on the defensive
Escudero’s tirade comes as the Anti-Money Laundering Council and Senate investigators connect irregular budget allocations to flood control projects allegedly cornered by favored contractors—many tied to the Discaya family, long considered the “king and queen” of DPWH contracts.
The scandal has put a spotlight on senators who approved questionable appropriations. Escudero, once hailed as a reformist, now finds himself in the hot seat, his name appearing in whispers about inserted projects and greenlit budgets that ballooned far beyond their original scope.
Critics say his attacks on Romualdez are less about truth-telling and more about political survival.
Turning the spotlight to Romualdez
Escudero charged that Romualdez manipulated the impeachment complaint against Vice President Sara Duterte to trigger the release of funds placed under “for later release” status—knowing fully well the Senate would not be able to act on it until June.
“Iisang tao lang ang nasa likod ng script at sarsuwelang ito. Siya ang dahilan ng kaguluhan, pagkakaaway-away, pagkakawatak-watak… maprotektahan lamang ang sarili niya,” Escudero alleged.
He further accused Romualdez of selective prosecution: freezing the assets of senator-linked personalities while protecting congressmen—except Rep. Zaldy Co, whom Escudero claims has been abandoned by his House allies.
Selective justice or diversionary tactics?
Escudero’s counteroffensive zeroed in on the handling of witnesses, particularly the Discaya couple. “Bakit ang daming kondisyon bago ipasok ang mga Discaya sa witness protection?” he asked, insinuating that the House leadership was shielding its own while weaponizing the system against the Senate.
But political observers see his outrage as a calculated attempt to divert the narrative. With his political capital dwindling after his ouster, Escudero has every incentive to redirect blame toward Romualdez and cast himself as a victim of a House-engineered witch hunt.
Legal countermoves and political irony
Escudero vowed to file charges against those he accuses of smearing his name, doubling down on his insistence that senators are being unfairly targeted for rejecting what he described as a “defective impeachment” against the Vice President.
“Nagkataon lang ba na ang mga nakaupong senador na dinidiin sa ngayon ay dating pangulo, dating pro tempore, dating punong mayorya ng senado… lahat nagkataon lang din ba na bumoto kontra sa impeachment ni Vice President Duterte, o talagang tinumbok lang kami?”
Ironically, the senator who once pushed for transparency and institutional reform now stands as one of the most embattled figures in the very scandal he sought to deflect.
The exposé unfolding in both chambers reveals not just a multi-billion peso flood control scam, but also the institutional rot that allows selective justice to flourish. Escudero’s finger-pointing at Romualdez may resonate with some, but for many, it raises a more uncomfortable question:
Is this about accountability—or just another layer of political theater meant to blur the lines of guilt?
