You know that feeling when you repeat something you heard, only to find out later it wasn't true? In Philippine journalism, we call that nakuryente (electrocuted). It sure stings and is embarrassing. And in politics, it's dangerous—not just for the person who got zapped, but for everyone whose name gets dragged into the mess.
Sen. Panfilo Lacson has built a whole career on not getting nakuryente. He doesn't speak without resibo, he says. He's the investigator. The guy who follows the evidence. And for a long time, that reputation worked for him.
But now? I'm not so sure.
The fight with Taguig has been going on for a while. And the more I watch it, the more I wonder: Is Lacson still investigating? Or is he just accusing? Because there's a big difference.
Take what happened at the Senate. DPWH Secretary Vince Dizon was asked straight up: Did you find a ghost project in Taguig among the ones you've already confirmed as ghost projects? He said no. Undersecretary Ricardo Bernabe lll added that all 107 Taguig projects on their list had documented accomplishments. That's not nothing. If you're trying to paint Taguig as ghost-project central, that answer hurts.
Lacson, however, didn't take it lying down. He said Dizon contradicted his own engineers. He said the secretary's memory was clouded. He brought up preliminary inspection reports where inspectors couldn't validate some projects, plus an AI analysis that flagged similar-looking billing photos.
I get that those are red flags, but a red flag is not a conviction. An anomaly that needs checking is not automatically a ghost project. And "we couldn't validate it during an inspection" is not the same as "it never existed."
Dizon later clarified. He said his answer was about conclusively established ghost projects nationwide—none of which were in Taguig. Yes, some Taguig projects were still being investigated. But they needed cross-checking and on-site verification. Don't jump to conclusions while the work is ongoing.
Lacson himself admitted that preliminary findings don't automatically prove a project was ghosted.
Wait, that admission basically undercuts all the certainty that came before it. Because earlier, Lacson went big by pointing to a Taguig project whose billing-photo coordinates reportedly landed 600 kilometers away in Leyte. "Since when has Taguig been located in Leyte?" Great line. But it's just a line. A bad geotag proves a bad geotag. It doesn't prove the project doesn't exist. And it definitely doesn't prove a politician stole money from it.
When he later said he wasn't concluding that the project was ghosted, the gap between accusation and evidence became impossible to ignore.
That's the danger of kuryente. It's rarely a completely fake story. It's usually something real, stripped of context. Suspicion becomes allegation. Allegation becomes headline. Headline becomes guilt in the public mind. And by the time investigators finish, reputations are already ruined.
A senator with Lacson's experience should know the difference between a lead and proof. That's the whole point of building a brand on receipts.
Then came the reclamation issue along Laguna Lake. Lacson released footage of a multi-agency inspection and called it impunity. "Somebody feels he is above the law," he said.
Taguig fired back with specifics. The property shown, the city said, wasn't land the city currently possesses or uses. Private individuals and a neighborhood association claimed it. The city said it issued no permit or authority to the alleged owners.
That denial doesn't prove Taguig is innocent. But the video doesn't prove Taguig is guilty either. And that's where real investigation should start, not end.
Who owns the land? Who ordered the filling? Who paid for it? Who delivered the materials? What permits existed, if any? Which official intervened, if any? Those are evidentiary questions. Geography can't answer them. Something happening on the Taguig side of Laguna Lake does not automatically mean the Taguig government ordered it.
Taguig said something worth repeating: the fight against corruption must be a fight for truth, not a contest of accusations. That line should apply to everyone, including Taguig. But it's a good standard. The moral authority of fighting corruption cannot become a license to imply guilt first and look for proof later.
What is worrying is how institutional this is getting.
Lacson has sent material on Taguig projects to the Ombudsman. He's asked the Ombudsman, PRA, LRA, LLDA, DENR, and DPWH to coordinate on the reclamation issue. There's nothing wrong with asking agencies to investigate. Nothing at all.
But there is something wrong if referrals and inspections start looking like instruments for settling political scores. And you can't separate this from the open war between Lacson and Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano. Cayetano says Lacson is acting as investigator, prosecutor, and judge. Lacson says Cayetano lacks credibility.
Political insults are cheap, but the institutional issue isn't.
The Ombudsman is not anyone's attack dog. The DPWH is not a private investigative bureau. Regulatory agencies aren't weapons aimed at adversaries. They belong to the Republic.
And remember that Lacson warned Dizon to beware of a possible cover-up, saying officials could face criminal liability, after Dizon's testimony didn't support the strongest version of the accusation. Whatever the intention, it creates the appearance of pressure. A serious anti-corruption advocate should be extra careful about that.
Lacson says his credibility is established. He says he doesn't make exposés without complete receipts. But credibility isn't self-authenticating. A reputation can't turn preliminary findings into final ones. "May resibo" doesn't tell us what the receipts prove.
If the evidence shows ghost projects, then prosecute. If it shows illegal reclamation, then prosecute whoever ordered it and benefited. But if it doesn't establish the personal culpability being insinuated, then it doesn't matter. That's integrity.
Kuryente is the right warning here. The most dangerous misinformation isn't always a fake document. Sometimes it's a real document without context. A preliminary finding dressed as final, a suspicious photo promoted as proof, and a discrepancy wrapped in certainty.
The answer isn't to stop investigating Taguig. The answer is to investigate harder, independently, without political choreography. Let the Ombudsman reach its own conclusion, free from intimidation from either camp.
Lacson has spent a career demanding that others answer to evidence. Now he has to show he respects evidence even when it won't cooperate with his narrative. Investigate Taguig. Investigate Cayetano. Investigate every contractor and every project, but he should not weaponize suspicion or turn independent institutions into instruments of revenge.
Otherwise, the master investigator risks the one fate he claims he hates most. He himself is nakuryente.