Photo credit: PCO

Many months ago, when DPWH Secretary Vivencio Dizon was appointed to the Cabinet, we wrote positively about him.

We were hopeful: finally, someone who could combine competence with communication.

Fast forward to today, and that optimism has begun to wilt.

Dizon has become the familiar type of government appointee: all publicity, photo ops, and visibility, but little delivery.

He appears everywhere, gestures for cameras, opens umbrellas at car auctions, smiles for press photos. Yet, when the department faces a real test of leadership, he disappears.

By contrast, former DPWH Secretary and ICI Commissioner Rogelio “Babes” Singson handled controversies with quiet authority. He rarely sought cameras, yet delivered results and maintained credibility.

Long after Singson retired, his credibility remains the benchmark for public officials overseeing multi-billion-peso department budgets and complex projects.

Dizon’s performance pales: much visibility, little resolution, and a reluctance to confront even simple administrative questions.

That is why the handling of the Cabral Files is so disappointing.

These are documents allegedly from the late former DPWH Undersecretary Maria Catalina Cabral, detailing draft budgets and purported “insertions” linked to officials and corruption.

Multiple versions are circulating, and questions have arisen about the involvement of Palace officials in project approvals.

All of this could have been avoided.

At the outset, the public asked a purely administrative question: Are these documents real working files from within DPWH, or not?

It could have been answered quickly. Yet Dizon chose otherwise.

Subjecting Cabral’s computer to forensic examination only underscores how badly the issue was handled.

What began as a simple question of document origin has become a criminal and cyber investigation involving the Ombudsman, COA, NBI, and PNP, because early clarity was withheld.

Forensic authentication answers questions of tampering and authorship. It does not excuse the failure to explain early whether the documents circulated from DPWH systems.

Why escalate a basic administrative question into a bureaucratic and media circus?

A single statement distinguishing working drafts from final budget authority could have cleared the air. Instead, ambiguity festered.

It doesn’t stop there.

Batangas Rep. Leandro Leviste has claimed that former Dizon undersecretary Arrey Perez tried to introduce controversial contractors party-list Rep. Edwin Gardiola to the Secretary for access to projects, evidence, he says, that contractor influence extends from Congress into the department.

He also alleged that an official very close to Dizon called him mid-press conference to prevent exposure of certain information.

Why can’t Dizon simply rebut this, plainly and directly? Instead of clarity, the public is offered silence. One might ask if the truth is inconvenient.

Beyond Leviste’s claims, reports indicate Dizon enjoys backing from a mystery tycoon, one of the country’s most powerful businessmen, and a major Pangasinan entrepreneur with land transport sector interests.

Some observers have pointed to Dizon’s reported insistence on keeping DOTr Acting Secretary Giovanni Lopez as part of broader questions about networks and alignments within government.

Has the pursuit of visibility, media optics, and political alliances overtaken accountability?

Leadership should prioritize transparency over theatrics, yet the flood of press releases and staged photo ops seems aimed at shaping perception, not performance.

The contrast is sharpened by Dizon’s track record.

During his tenure as BCDA president, a graft and malversation complaint was filed over the P11-billion New Clark City facilities for the 2019 SEA Games, allegations he has denied.

Taken together, they establish a pattern of controversy and raise questions about influence and accountability, according to public reports.

Beyond controversies, Dizon’s career reflects political adaptability and mobility, having moved comfortably across administrations and power centers. From the late senator Ed Angara's camp, to the Noynoy Aquino administration through Akbayan’s Ronald Llamas, then through senators Alan Cayetano, Bong Go, and Duterte circles, and now into the Marcos Cabinet.

The contrast between Dizon’s media-savvy, politically adaptive image and his performance in moments demanding clarity and transparency is stark.

The issue is not only whether allegations are true. It is whether patterns of leadership inspire confidence or doubt.

Verification is not admission. Explaining internal processes is not self-incrimination. Yet Dizon acted as if even basic clarification was too risky.

By treating a management issue like a courtroom battle, he allowed speculation to flourish.

Good governance is not about hiding behind process. It is about owning it.

A competent response would have clearly distinguished working files from final authority, drafts from decisions, tracking figures from actual disbursements.

None of this required waiting for the Ombudsman or the Office of the President.
It required leadership willing to speak plainly.

Vivencio Dizon missed that moment.

By refusing to verify and explain, DPWH surrendered control of the narrative. Leadership is tested not when problems are complex, but when they are simple and still mishandled.

The Cabral Files should have been a routine verification exercise. Under Dizon, they became a cautionary tale.

Ang madaling linawin ay sadyang pinalabo.

Ang dapat na ipaliwanag agad ay piniling ipagpaliban.

At sa ganitong uri ng pamumuno, kahit walang kasalanan, nagmumukhang may itinatago.

Meron ba, Mr. Secretary? Nagtatanong lang po.

We will cover more on Dizon in future columns.

Ed Javier

Ed Javier is a veteran communicator with over 35 years of experience in corporate, government, and advocacy communications, spanning the terms of seven Philippine presidents. He is also a political analyst, entrepreneur, and media professional. Drawing on this experience, he delivers clear, accessible analysis of political, governance, and business issues.