Palace hits Discayas over ‘misinformation’ on PH film center project

SUBSTANDARD WORK. The Philippine Film Heritage Building in Intramuros, Manila. Palace Press Officer Claire Castro on Thursday (Sept. 4, 2025) criticized the defects in the building’s construction, which was handled by the Discaya-owned Great Pacific Builders and General Contractor, Inc. (Photo courtesy: Presidential Photojournalists Association via PNA)

By Ruth Abbey Gita-Carlos | Philippine News Agency

Malacañang on Saturday slammed the camp of contractor couple Cezarah “Sarah” and Pacifico “Curlee” Discaya for claiming that the second phase of the Philippine Film Heritage Building (PFHB) construction project was not handled by their construction firm.

In a statement, Palace Press Officer Claire Castro advised the Discayas to revisit all existing contracts of one of their nine companies, Great Pacific Builders and General Contractor, Inc., with the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).

“They might have forgotten their commitments, considering the numerous projects that they got from the government. Wrong information given to the media may cause confusion to the people,” she said.

Castro issued the statement after Cornelio Samaniego, the lawyer of the Discaya couple, said that Great Pacific Builders had only secured the first phase of the PFHB construction project and a different construction company handled the second phase.

Samaniego said the Discaya-owned firm turned over Phase 1 of the project in December 2024 and secured a certificate of completion.

Castro said Great Pacific Builders “voluntarily entered” into a contract agreement for Phase 2 of the project with DPWH representative Manny Bulusan from the Office of the District Engineer.

She said the Discayas agreed to execute the “works” under Contract ID No. 230H0119: Local Program/ National Building Program/ Buildings and other Structures- Multi-Purpose/Facilities – Construction of FDCP Film Heritage Building in Intramuros, Manila, for a total contract price of P107,983,255.11.

She added that the contract has a project duration of 240 calendar days, with the original expiry date set Sept. 4, 2025.

“In addition, this contract was duly notarized by Atty. M. Laguerta of the City of Manila. Moreover, this ‘contract’ is not the same work/contract mentioned by the counsel (for the Discayas), which was allegedly completed by his clients in December 2024,” she said.

“Common sense will dictate us that the contractor cannot finish the project in December 2024 when the contract was merely executed into a contract on Jan. 2. 2025. Paano mangyayari na natapos ang kontrata noong December 2024 pero ang kontrata ay magsisimula nang January 2025?”

Castro on Thursday warned of possible legal action against the Discayas over the poor structural design and sloppy construction of the PFHB.

In an Instagram post on Friday, First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos expressed dismay over the substandard construction of the film heritage center, calling it a “rotten monument of incompetence.”

Popular

PBBM modernizes outdated gov’t data classification framework

By Brian Campued Underscoring the need to modernize the government’s decades-old classification system, President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. has issued Executive Order (EO) No. 119,...

Impeachment Trial Day 6: Prosecution, defense argue over subpoena for VP Sara’s bank, tax records

By Dean Aubrey Caratiquet and Brian Campued On Tuesday, July 14, the defense team of Vice President Sara Duterte continued its cross-examination of National Bureau...

PBBM leaves for Singapore to boost trade, ASEAN ties

By Darryl John Esguerra | Philippine News Agency President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. left for Singapore on Tuesday for a two-day working visit aimed at...

Impeachment Trial Day 5: Prosecution’s witness Lotoc doubles down on the context behind VP Sara’s utterances

By Dean Aubrey Caratiquet and Brian Campued On Monday, July 13, the House prosecution panel presented its second witness, National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) BARMM...