The Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) has officially revoked the professional license of former Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) engineer Henry Alcantara. This decisive action follows findings linking him to anomalous and non-existent flood control projects in Bulacan.
Grounds for Revocation: Gross Unprofessional Conduct
The Professional Regulatory Board of Civil Engineering (PRB-CE) found Henry C. Alcantara guilty of gross unprofessional and unethical conduct. The PRC stated that the board's decision was firmly based on the results of the DPWH's own administrative proceedings. These proceedings had previously established Alcantara's administrative liability for grave offenses concerning the disbursement of public funds.
The case centered on payments approved for infrastructure projects that were either non-existent or classified as "ghost" projects. The PRB-CE also considered the DPWH's Special Audit Report and Decision as critical evidence. "The Board established that Engineer Alcantara willfully approved payments for these ghost projects, an act that constitutes a severe breach of the Code of Ethics for Civil Engineers and a betrayal of public trust," the commission emphasized.
Procedural Remedies and Appeal Process
Despite the revocation order, the PRC clarified that Alcantara retains certain procedural rights to challenge the decision. He has the right to file a Motion for Reconsideration (MR) with the PRB-CE within 15 days from receiving the official decision. Should the MR be denied, Alcantara can still exercise a further right to appeal.
The commission specified that following an unfavorable resolution on the MR, he may file a notice of appeal directly with the PRC. This subsequent appeal must also be submitted within a 15-day period from receipt of the PRB-CE's resolution.
Broader Implications for Public Trust and Accountability
This case highlights ongoing efforts to enforce accountability within government infrastructure projects. The revocation of a professional license represents a significant professional and legal consequence for engineers found violating ethical codes and public trust. It serves as a stern reminder of the legal and professional repercussions for misconduct in the disbursement and management of public funds, particularly in critical areas like flood control.
The finality of the decision now hinges on whether the former DPWH engineer will pursue the available appeals process in the coming days.
