The Philippines advances toward digitizing governance through the Citizen Access and Disclosure of Expenditures for National Accountability (CADENA) Act, the conversation is shifting from whether to digitize, to how it could actually done. And according to blockchain advocate and Bitskwela CEO Jiro Reyes, not all digital systems are created equal.

“Puwede namang mag-change ng data in a tamper-proof environment, pero it has to be an append. Ibig-sabihin it’s a new transaction or entry altogether. Kapag kasi tamper-evident, you can change the source data,” Reyes said in a recent Senate hearing on the bill.

In one remark, Reyes underscored what could become a defining issue in the architecture of government transparency: the difference between tamper-evident and tamper-proof systems. On the surface, both terms sound secure. But their practical implications are far from interchangeable.

A tamper-evident system can detect when data has been altered, but often only after the fact. Think of it like a sealed envelope: if the seal is broken, you know someone accessed it, but the contents may already be compromised.

By contrast, a tamper-proof or append-only system records every new entry without altering previous ones. It’s more like a black box in aviation or a public ledger: changes are transparent, sequential, and irreversible without a visible trail. Modifications must be added as new transactions, preserving the full history of data over time.

Why Append-Only Architecture Matters for Government Transparency

Legal experts and tech stakeholders are sounding the alarm: digitizing corruption is no better than analog corruption. Without the right technical safeguards, even digital systems can enable manipulation—just faster, and potentially at scale.

Atty. Mark Gorriceta of the Blockchain Council of the Philippines issued this warning:

“If it’s not clear, if there’s no mention of tamper-proof or immutability… maybe we will be back to square one where data can still be manipulated.”

Together with Reyes, Gorriceta proposed that the CADENA Act mandate the use of an append-only, cryptographically verifiable ledger as the standard for government records.

Why this matters: append-only systems not only deter fraud but ensure full auditability; meaning that every fund release, amendment, or procurement contract can be traced without gaps or deletions. This creates a public accountability trail that can’t be quietly rewritten.

Real-World Parallels: Where Tamper-Proof Systems Already Work

The superiority of append-only models isn’t hypothetical. In finance, global institutions like JPMorgan and the DTCC use append-only distributed ledgers to track asset transfers and compliance. In aviation, black boxes offer an unalterable record of events. In healthcare, immutable logs are used to track patient data changes—ensuring legal and ethical traceability.

The point: When accuracy and accountability matter most, tamper-proof—not just tamper-evident—systems are the standard.

A Call for Clear Standards in the CADENA Act

The current version of the CADENA Act leaves the choice of technology open, in line with its principle of being future-ready. However, this flexibility also risks ambiguity in critical safeguards like immutability and data verifiability.

Reyes and Gorriceta’s proposal doesn’t prescribe blockchain by name, but it does aim to enshrine the principle of append-only architecture into law, raising the bar for any system seeking compliance.

This ensures that future-proofing doesn’t come at the expense of security and that “digitization” doesn’t merely replicate old flaws with new tools.

Openness to Strengthen the Bill Further

Senator Bam Aquino, principal author of the CADENA Act, welcomed these insights. Since his opening remarks, he reiterated the Senate’s willingness to improve the bill’s wording to avoid any misunderstanding about its safeguards:

“Kung may maisip kayo na bago… na baka magandang ma-refine ‘yung mga words, may salita na baka ma-misunderstand, baka puwede nating ma-define nang mas maganda.”

He also directly invited Jiro Reyes to submit the recommendation in writing for inclusion during the next phase of the legislative process.

The CADENA Act has the potential to set a new standard for digital governance. The choice between tamper-evident and tamper-proof systems will determine whether that standard is symbolic, or substantive.

‍