A COURT case involving an alleged P96.5-million “ghost” flood control project took a significant turn Tuesday, April 28, 2026, as a former employee testified about the operations of companies allegedly linked to the scandal.
The 33-year-old witness, a former liaison officer, testified against spouses Sarah and Pacifico “Curlee” Discaya II. She told the court the couple manages nine companies, including St. Timothy Construction Corp. (STCC), which is at the center of the graft and malversation case.
Insider details office setup
The witness, who worked for the company from 2018 to 2025, testified that several firms operated from the same building. She described St. Gerard Construction as a “mother company” overseeing several other entities.
According to her testimony, liaison officers reported directly to the Discaya spouses on bidding and budget matters.
She also said multiple companies shared the same marketing and engineering departments.
The witness presented employment contracts and internal records to establish her long-term connection to the firms.
The “shareholder” mystery
One of the witness’s key claims involved discovering her name listed as a shareholder of STCC without her consent. She said she learned of it only after seeing news reports in 2025.
“I never signed any document or invested in the company,” she told the court.
To support her claim that she could not have afforded to be an investor, she presented payslips showing her monthly salary started at P14,000 in 2018 and rose to P19,000 by 2025, often leaving her with take-home pay of only P5,000 to P7,000.
Tense cross-examination
Defense lawyers challenged the witness’s account.
Cornelio Samaniego III, counsel for company president Ma. Roma Rimando, argued the witness was in fact a board member.
The defense argued that under a 1984 law, only board members or authorized representatives may purchase bidding documents.
The witness also acknowledged earning a 20 percent commission on successful bids, which the defense said totaled about P4 million over seven years.
The defense further argued her calm reaction to being named in the scandal was “unusual.”
The witness clarified that while she was sometimes referred to as a “board member” during the bidding process, she was never an official member of the STCC board.
What happens next?
Judge Nelson Leyco noted differences between documents presented in court and those reported by the media. Because of those discrepancies and the need for additional testimony, the trial will continue.
The next hearings are scheduled for May 5 and May 19, with the prosecution’s witness set to return June 2.
The case remains a high-priority investigation into allegations that P96.5 million in public funds was spent on a flood control project in Davao Occidental that did not exist.