THE sun may be the world’s most abundant source of energy, but the controversy surrounding Sen. Loren Legarda, her son Batangas Rep. Leandro Leviste, and former energy secretary Alfonso Cusi is casting a long shadow over the country’s renewable energy sector. The Office of the Ombudsman has begun a preliminary investigation into complaints alleging plunder, graft, conflict of interest, and other irregularities involving solar energy projects associated with Leviste’s companies.
Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla gave the controversy a name Filipinos are unlikely to forget: “ghost electricity.” Unlike ghost roads or ghost buildings, this case involves electricity that was promised but allegedly never produced — power plants that failed to materialize and energy that never reached Filipino homes and businesses. “We’ve been hitting ghost projects, but this one is ghost electricity,” Remulla said. He further claimed that while the contracts involved were worth around P10 billion, the economic opportunities allegedly lost by the country could reach hundreds of billions of pesos.
That allegation deserves more than a passing headline. Electricity powers homes, hospitals, factories, schools and the economy itself. Every megawatt delayed or never generated can mean higher electricity prices, fewer investments, slower economic growth, lost jobs and greater costs ultimately borne by ordinary Filipino families.
According to the Department of Energy (DOE), 33 renewable energy service contracts associated with Solar Philippines were terminated after the projects failed to meet their commitments. Those contracts represented more than 11,400 megawatts of potential generating capacity — about 64 percent of all renewable energy capacity covered by contracts terminated or relinquished in 2024 and 2025. The DOE is likewise pursuing around P24 billion in contractual obligations and penalties.
These figures raise an obvious question: How did one corporate group accumulate such a substantial portion of the country’s renewable energy pipeline without first demonstrating that it could actually deliver?
That is where this controversy extends beyond ordinary business failure. The allegations before the Ombudsman suggest that government-issued energy contracts and privileges were accumulated, transferred among affiliated companies, and eventually monetized despite the failure to produce the electricity promised to the country. As Remulla summarized it, the projects were allegedly sold, and profits were realized, but the electricity was never delivered.
If proven, the issue is not simply that a private business venture failed. Businesses fail every day. The allegation is that valuable public privileges were secured, competitors were effectively crowded out, the projects remained largely unrealized, and the resulting corporate interests were later sold for profit. In other words, the contracts allegedly generated value even though the electricity never did.
In 2019, Solar Para sa Bayan Corp. obtained a 25-year congressional franchise to construct and operate distributed energy resources and microgrids in remote, unserved and underserved communities. Although the franchise was expressly non-exclusive, its nationwide scope and the volume of renewable energy contracts subsequently controlled by Leviste-linked companies have fueled questions about whether the group occupied an unusually privileged position in the industry. A congressional franchise is more than a business permit. It is a privilege granted by the Republic in exchange for public service, and it comes with a corresponding obligation to deliver.
Former House deputy speaker Lito Atienza, who opposed the franchise, has said he is prepared to testify. He claims he questioned the company’s capability from the outset because of its allegedly inadequate capitalization and unrealistic commitments. More seriously, he alleged that Legarda personally lobbied lawmakers to support the franchise and later offered him P10 million in government funding after he opposed it. These remain allegations that must be tested through evidence and due process. Legarda has categorically denied the accusations, calling them “utterly false and baseless,” and has maintained that no public funds were involved.
Even assuming no government funds were directly released, the public interest remains. A congressional franchise has value. Renewable energy service contracts have value. Control over thousands of megawatts of generating capacity has value. So does the opportunity denied to other qualified developers. Public loss is not measured only by money leaving the Treasury. It may also be measured by delayed investments, unrealized power generation, reduced competition, and years of economic opportunity that can never be recovered.
The political dimension likewise cannot be ignored. At the time the franchise was being considered, Legarda chaired the Senate committee on finance. There is nothing inherently improper about a public official having a successful child. But when an immediate family member seeks an extraordinary privilege from the government, the standard must be higher than merely avoiding a technical violation of the law. The public deserves to know whether political influence played any role in the grant of the franchise and the subsequent issuance of renewable energy contracts, whether regulators acted solely on technical merit, and whether the country’s energy future was used for private enrichment instead of public benefit.
These questions deserve answers based on documents, financial records, contract-performance reports, and sworn testimony — not speculation. Renewable energy should have meant cleaner power, stronger energy security, and lower electricity costs, not allegations of political patronage or regulatory capture.
The promise was sunlight converted into electricity. The allegation now being investigated is that political influence was converted into corporate value instead. The contracts were real. The franchise was real. The subsequent transactions were real. According to the Ombudsman’s allegations, the electricity is what allegedly never materialized.
The Ombudsman must therefore follow the evidence wherever it leads. Because while businesses can recover from failed ventures, the Filipino people cannot recover the years they spent paying high electricity costs while thousands of megawatts allegedly existed only on paper. No family, however influential, should be allowed to corner the sun. And no Filipino should ever have to pay for ghost electricity.
