Lanao del Sur Rep. Zia Adiong pushed back against Baguio City Mayor Benjamin Magalong’s claim that 90% of House members are corrupt, calling the sweeping allegation “irresponsible” and urging that such accusations be backed by solid evidence.
Adiong said public officials have a responsibility to speak with clarity and precision, especially when making serious claims involving corruption.
“As public officers and public officials, we carry responsibility when we speak about certain matters — not only to give clarity to the public, but with precision,” Adiong said. “When I say precision, it has to also be backed up by evidence, solid evidence.”
Magalong earlier said in an interview that around 90% of members of the House of Representatives are corrupt, describing it as part of a systemic problem within the institution.
Adiong said calls for accountability are welcome but must be supported by concrete proof and directed at specific individuals rather than the entire chamber.
“We cannot dismiss that because we also welcome any effort from any sectors in our society to call for accountability,” he said. “But accountability also should be coupled with the observance of due process.”
He stressed that due process requires accusations against any person or institution to be supported by evidence, adding that generalizing the entire House is unfair.
“It is quite irresponsible and unfair to just brush the entire institution with a single stroke and to say that 90% of the members are corrupt,” Adiong said. “We should be judged based on our individual work.”
The lawmaker noted that the House, composed of more than 300 members elected nationwide, has undertaken multiple inquiries and hearings aimed at ensuring accountability among public officials.
“The House of Representatives has been standing on the principle of accountability,” he said, citing committee investigations, including those conducted by the Committee on Justice.
Adiong also urged Magalong, a former police official known for his anti-corruption stance, to identify specific individuals if he has evidence rather than making broad accusations.
“If he has names, it’s better to name names rather than to attack the entire institution,” he said.
He added that while criticism is part of democratic discourse, it should not come at the expense of undermining the credibility of an entire government body without sufficient basis.
