P1.4 Billion Scandal Shadows Cacdac’s Courtesy Resignation

By Louis ‘Barok‘ C Biraogo — May 23, 2024

The P1.4-billion land deal scandal at the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA) is a gut-punch to the overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) whose remittances keep the Philippines afloat. This isn’t just bureaucratic incompetence—it’s a calculated betrayal of trust, with former Administrator Arnell Ignacio’s unauthorized signature on a dubious real estate purchase exposing a cesspool of legal violations, governance failures, and moral decay. Department of Migrant Workers (DMW) Secretary Hans Leo Cacdac’s claim of being “clueless” as OWWA Board Chair is either a confession of negligence or a flimsy cover for complicity. His courtesy resignation on May 22, 2025, following President Marcos Jr.’s cabinet reshuffle directive, begs the question: Is this accountability, or an escape from a scandal that demands answers? The OFWs deserve more than platitudes—they deserve justice.

A Billion-Peso Heist: How the Law Was Shredded

The OWWA land deal is a legal massacre. Former Administrator Arnell Ignacio’s unauthorized P1.4-billion purchase of land near NAIA Terminal 1 for an “unnecessary” halfway house violates multiple statutes, exposing a governance structure that’s either comatose or corrupt. Here’s the wreckage:

Republic Act (RA) 10801, Section 10(c): The OWWA Act mandates board approval for major expenditures. GMA News Online reports Ignacio bypassed the board, rendering the deal legally suspect and potentially voidable.
RA 3019, Section 3(g): The Anti-Graft Act prohibits contracts “manifestly and grossly disadvantageous” to the government. Cacdac’s admission that the project was unneeded suggests a potential breach if costs were inflated or terms favored private parties.
RA 7080 (Plunder): Transactions over P50 million involving corruption trigger plunder charges. At P1.4 billion, the deal qualifies, but no evidence yet confirms personal gain, a critical gap for prosecution.

Notably, RA 9184 and RA 12009, the procurement laws, do not typically apply to government land purchases, as these are governed by RA 8974 and RA 10752 for infrastructure-related acquisitions. However, the absence of transparent processes and board approval still raises questions about compliance with these alternative frameworks, especially for a non-infrastructure project like a halfway house. The deal’s execution by an unnamed “shadow committee,” as reported by LionhearTV, suggests a deliberate sidestep of accountability.

Cacdac’s dual role as DMW Secretary and OWWA Chair amplifies his accountability. His claim of ignorance about a billion-peso deal is either gross negligence or a convenient lie. The 1987 Constitution’s Article XI, Section 1 demands “utmost responsibility” from public officials. Drawing from corporate law principles like Stone v. Ritter (Delaware, 2006), directors are liable for failing to monitor operations. Cacdac’s oversight of the DMW’s internal probe into his own board’s lapses, as reported by ABS-CBN News, is a conflict of interest that mocks accountability. The law wasn’t just broken—it was obliterated.

Shadow Puppets and a Board in the Dark

The scandal’s heart is a mysterious “shadow committee” that greenlit the P1.4-billion deal without board approval, as exposed by Rappler. RA 10801 vests authority solely in the OWWA Board, not rogue cliques. The committee’s members, mandate, and legal basis remain undisclosed, pointing to either deliberate circumvention or systemic rot. Cacdac’s claim that he was unaware of its actions indicts his leadership. If true, it reveals a board so detached it failed to police its own structure. If false, it suggests complicity in bypassing oversight. Either way, the board’s silence on what Rappler called “at least six counts” of violations exposes a governance blackout.

This isn’t just Ignacio’s overreach—it’s an agency where accountability is a fairy tale. The DMW’s internal investigation, led by Cacdac, is a sham when his own failures are in question. The 1987 Constitution’s Article XI, Section 13 empowers the Ombudsman to probe “illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient” acts. A P1.4-billion unauthorized deal demands this independent scrutiny, not an in-house cover-up. The shadow committee’s opacity is a governance abyss, and only an Ombudsman-led probe can unmask the puppeteers.

Stabbing OFWs in the Heart: A Trust Shattered

The ethical fallout is a dagger to OFWs. OWWA’s P1.4-billion trust fund, built on their contributions, is meant to serve their welfare under RA 10801, Section 14. Malacañang’s claim, reported by Canadian Inquirer, that the deal used government funds, not the trust, is cold comfort when board approval was bypassed. This flouts procedural safeguards, treating OFW contributions as a slush fund. The Commission on Audit (COA) must publish a full accounting—claiming the fund is “intact” without transparent records is meaningless.

The board’s inaction, Cacdac’s claimed cluelessness, and the silence of other officials violate RA 6713, which demands public responsiveness. The Supreme Court’s ruling in Jaca v. People (G.R. No. 166967, 2013) held officials liable for failing to ensure proper fund use—a principle that applies here. This scandal is a moral disgrace to the 1.96 million OFWs whose remittances accounted for 8.5% of the Philippines’ GDP in 2024, per Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. Their trust has been torched, and silence is complicity in a system that fails its most vulnerable.

Cacdac’s Record: Targeted or Justified?

Cacdac’s tenure as DMW Secretary, appointed in April 2024, has faced scrutiny, but much appears politically driven. During his August 2024 confirmation hearings, critics raised issues like extended COVID-19 quarantines, a July 2024 DMW hacking incident, and alleged inaction on OFWs in Russia and Houthi hostage cases. CA members, including Rep. Johnny Pimentel, dismissed these as “baseless,” per Malaya. The quarantine was a national policy, the hacking was beyond Cacdac’s control, and DMW’s efforts in the Houthi crisis—repatriating 21 of 22 sailors from the MV Tutor, per GMA News Online—show diligence, not neglect.

His courtesy resignation, reported by the Philippine News Agency, aligns with Marcos’ post-election recalibration, a procedural norm. Yet, its timing—days after the scandal’s exposure—raises suspicions of shielding Cacdac from accountability. While no evidence ties him to personal gain, his oversight failure as OWWA Chair is undeniable. The resignation may signal Marcos’ intent to distance his administration from the scandal, but it risks letting Cacdac evade scrutiny for systemic lapses.

Resignation Isn’t Enough: Torch the Rot

Cacdac’s resignation must be accepted—not because he’s guilty of corruption, but because his leadership allowed a P1.4-billion disaster. Trust in OWWA demands a clean slate. His claimed ignorance is a failure of fiduciary duty under Article XI, Section 1. A new leader must prioritize transparency to restore OFW confidence. But resignation alone won’t fix a broken system.

Systemic Reforms:

Amend RA 10801: Mandate explicit board approval for transactions over P50 million, with no delegation unless documented and ratified. Require real-time reporting to the board chair.
Independent Oversight: Create an external audit body with OFW representatives to monitor OWWA finances, ensuring stakeholder accountability.
End Dual Roles: Prohibit the DMW Secretary from chairing the OWWA Board to prevent conflicts, aligning with global governance standards.

Ongoing Accountability:

Ombudsman Investigation: Refer Ignacio and all signatories to the Ombudsman for potential RA 3019 and RA 7080 violations. Uncover the shadow committee’s members and authority.
Full COA Audit: Publish a comprehensive audit of OWWA’s 2024-2025 transactions, exposing every peso and signature.

Marcos’ Moment: Justice or Optics?

President Marcos Jr. stands at a crossroads. Accepting Cacdac’s resignation is the first step, but it’s not enough. Will he prioritize optics, letting a courtesy resignation bury the scandal, or seize this moment to dismantle a culture of impunity? The Ombudsman must probe every corner of this deal, and the COA must lay bare OWWA’s books. Transparency is a constitutional mandate under Article XI. OFWs deserve answers: Who was on that committee? Why was the board bypassed? Where did P1.4 billion go? If Marcos fails to act, the next billion might already be gone.

Evidence Gaps: No proof of personal gain exists for plunder charges under RA 7080, pending investigation. The shadow committee’s composition and authority remain undisclosed, blocking full accountability. The Ombudsman’s probe is critical to resolve these.