Former officials Hernandez and Mendoza have pleaded not guilty to charges related to the alleged “ghost” flood control project in Bulacan, according to court proceedings.

The case centers on allegations that public funds were disbursed for a flood control project that was either non-existent or substantially incomplete, raising questions about documentation, project validation, and oversight. Prosecutors have presented claims tied to procurement records and disbursement trails, while the defense maintains that the accused are not criminally liable.

The plea of not guilty moves the case into the trial phase, where evidence, witnesses, and audit findings will be examined. Legal observers note that in infrastructure-related cases, outcomes often hinge on technical proof—including site verification, engineering reports, and financial records—rather than rhetoric.

Authorities reiterated that a plea is not a verdict and that the accused are entitled to due process. The court is expected to set schedules for the presentation of evidence from both sides.

For the public, the development underscores a familiar reality in accountability cases: claims are tested in court, not online.

In public works, concrete speaks louder than paper.