By DAVE SUAN ALBARADO
All 42 infrastructure projects requested by Bohol 3rd District Rep. Kristine Alexie Tutor for the 2025 Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) budget and included in the General Appropriations Act went to a Batangas-based congressman accused of masterminding the buy and sell of DPWH projects, according to leaked DPWH documents analyzed by Bilyonaryo News Channel.
The documents, dubbed the “DPWH leaks,” allegedly detail project proponents before the agency’s formal budget submission to Congress.
Tutor’s requests totaled around P2.7 billion, divided into P150 million under an “allocable” tag and nearly P2.6 billion under a “Centi2025” tag.
Of the 22 projects under Centi2025, 13 had existing contracts, with nearly P1.7 billion awarded to two firms: a joint venture of JH Pahara Construction Corp. and S-Ang Construction Trading for three flood control projects in Sierra Bullones, and Newington Building Corp. for road projects costing P61.3 million to P156.3 million each.
Bilyonaryo previously reported that S-Ang and Newington are owned by the family of Construction Workers Solidarity (CWS) party-list Rep. Edwin Gardiola.
Tutor did not deny the list’s authenticity, saying she was only advocating for her district’s needs as a lawmaker.
She claimed having no control over project execution or contractor selection, attributing her name’s appearance to her proactive efforts for development.
Further review of the leaks revealed additional 2025-tagged flood control projects in Zambales, Bataan and Batangas awarded to S-Ang, Newington and Laurel Development Corp., companies allegedly tied to Gardiola’s family.
Gardiola, a veteran contractor elected to Congress in 2022 as CWS party-list representative, is among eight lawmakers facing recommended charges from the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) and DPWH in November 2025 for plunder cases and possible violations of anti-graft laws and conflict of interest in flood control contracts.
Reports allege his family-linked firms secured billions in DPWH contracts since his election, involving schemes of pre-arranging budget items and rigged bidding.
Gardiola has denied wrongdoing, stating allegations are untrue and he will address them in the proper forum.
Bilyonaryo said it is seeking Gardiola’s comment on the latest leaks involving Tutor’s projects.
The revelations come amid ongoing investigations into DPWH corruptions, including pre-arranged awards and rigged bids.
TUTOR DENIES
Bohol 3rd District Rep. Kristine Alexie Besas-Tutor has forcefully rejected allegations that billions of pesos in infrastructure projects for her district were improperly inserted into the 2025 national budget, escalating a controversy that has ignited debates about government transparency, press freedom and the budget process in the country.
The firestorm began after documents dubbed “DPWH Leaks” surfaced following the death of Department of Public Works and Highways Undersecretary Catalina Cabral.
The leaked materials detailed proposed infrastructure projects for the 2025 National Expenditure Program, listing various lawmakers and the amounts associated with their districts.
According to the leaked documents, Tutor topped the list of congressional representatives with P2.7 billion pesos in DPWH proposals, though some reports cited her district’s total infrastructure allocation at P6.6 billion pesos.
Tutor Calls Coverage ‘Misleading’
Tutor launched a scathing attack on The Bohol Tribune, accusing it of deliberately misleading the public with its headline and coverage of the leaked documents.
“As expected from BOHOL TRIBUNE! Since Day 1, this has been the kind of news you deliver. Misleading the public always with your headline. Instead of giving the people the right information, you are doing the reverse,” Tutor said in a statement posted on social media.
The congresswoman took particular issue with the newspaper’s use of the term “insertions,” which implies funds were secretly or suddenly added to the budget.
She argued that the correct term should be “proposals,” which are part of the legitimate budget process.
“Bilyonaryo News clearly states that these are DPWH Proposals and these are not ‘INSERTIONS,'” Tutor stressed, referring to the national news outlet that originally reported on the leaked documents.
Tutor accused The Bohol Tribune of political bias, suggesting the outlet’s coverage was influenced by political affiliations.
She contrasted the Tribune’s reporting with that of The Bohol Chronicle, another Bohol publication, urging readers to “choose your subscription wisely” between being “informed or be misinformed.”
Budget Process
In her defense, Tutor provided a detailed explanation of how infrastructure projects make their way into the national budget, refuting claims that the funds were improperly secured.
According to the congresswoman, all projects originated from formal resolutions passed by barangay councils and Sangguniang Bayan (municipal councils). These proposals were then evaluated by municipal development councils, followed by provincial development councils, and finally regional development councils before being incorporated into the National Expenditure Program.
“These projects went through proper and transparent government process,” Tutor insisted, saying that all listed projects were openly deliberated by the executive branch and Congress and followed the standard legal budget cycle.
She explained that the documents labeled as “leaks” are actually part of the public budget process—representing the line-items for the DPWH Budget Proposal that would be presented and debated in Congress before becoming part of the General Appropriations Act.
The ‘DPWH Leaks’ Controversy
The leaked documents emerged amid scandals about what DPWH officials have termed “inappropriate intervention” in the budget process—the use of power by senators, congressional representatives, executive department officials and local executives to require district engineers to submit lists of projects that could be sponsored during the budget legislation process.
The “DPWH Leaks” listed other lawmakers with substantial infrastructure proposals beyond Tutor:
Top Five Congressional Representatives:
1. Bohol 3rd District Rep. Kristine Alexie Tutor – 2.7 billion pesos
2. Former Batangas 6th District Rep. Ralph Recto – 2.4 billion pesos
3. Ang Probinsyano Party-list Rep. Alfred Delos Santos – 2.1 billion pesos
4. Negros Oriental 2nd District Rep. Manuel “Chiquiting” Sagarbarria – 2 billion pesos
5. Palawan 2nd District Rep. Jose Alvarez – 1.6 billion pesos
Additional lawmakers with over 1 billion pesos in sponsored projects:
– Rep. Loreto Amben Amante – 1.085 billion pesos
– Rep. Gerville R. Luistro – 1.085 billion pesos
– Rep. Eric R. Buhain – 1.076 billion pesos
– Rep. Gerardo J. Espina Jr. – 1.036 billion pesos
– Rep. Emerson “Emeng” Pascual – 1.023 billion pesos
Why Bohol’s Third District Received More Funding
Tutor defended the substantial allocation to her district by highlighting its size and infrastructure needs.
The Third District is the largest congressional district in Bohol, encompassing 19 municipalities and 436 barangays. This geographic scope results in a high volume of infrastructure requests from local government units, Tutor explained.
“The funding is the result of my sustained efforts in endorsing district proposals to national agencies,” she said, attributing the allocation to her continuous advocacy for infrastructure projects such as flood control systems and road improvements.
According to reports, the total infrastructure funding allocated across Bohol’s three congressional districts for 2025 amounts to approximately 15 billion pesos:
– Third District (Rep. Alexie Tutor) – P6.6 billion pesos
– Second District (Rep. Vanvan Aumentado) – P3.2 billion pesos
– First District (Rep. Edgar Chatto) – P3.0 billion pesos
Tutor said there is no cause for alarm over the higher allocation to her district, adding that constituents should instead be grateful for the support extended by national agencies and fellow lawmakers who recognized the importance of the proposed projects.
She pointed out that the materials do not contain specific project line items that would validate the allegations of improper budget insertions. Without detailed breakdowns of individual projects, Tutor argued, the documents cannot substantiate claims that funds were improperly secured.
While the practice of lawmakers endorsing projects for their districts is common and often viewed as constituent service, critics have long raised questions about whether such influence represents “inappropriate intervention” in what should be a more technocratic process based purely on development priorities.
The leak of these documents—which according to Tutor are simply part of the normal public budget process—has nevertheless raised questions about how much visibility the public typically has into which lawmakers are advocating for which projects and how funding decisions are made.
Tutor’s defense rests on the argument that her projects followed all proper procedures and were based on legitimate local government requests that went through multiple levels of review. She maintains that the term “proposals” rather than “insertions” is crucial, as it distinguishes between projects that went through proper channels versus those that might have been improperly added to the budget.