The Basis of Blasphemy
Hole of Justice
by Peter G. Jimenea
Blasphemy!
The new Ombudsman Conchita
Carpio Morales should exercise proper and strict monitoring of her people because
there was no guarantee that when Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez stepped down,
all crooks have gone with her.
Look at the Iloilo City
Housing Project for City Hall employees at Pavia, Iloilo. The case for
Violation of the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. 3019) against the
concerned officials was filed in 2004 but only slept there at the office of
Ombudsman Gutierrez for over five years.
In 2010, Overall Deputy
Ombudsman Orlando Casimiro sent a decision to Visayas Deputy Ombudsman Pelagio
Apostol indicting former Mayor Mansueto Malabor, et al, but still groping in
the dark for probable cause against the implementing Mayor Jerry Trenas (now
congressman) and his wards.
This is what got us so
badly disillusioned. Even a fish vendor can easily say that the defiance of the
mayor to the two urgent resolutions of the Sangguniang Panlungsod requesting
him to suspend the project and sue the contractor has an accompanying obligation.
But the Office of the Ombudsman
is privileged too, to exercise selective prosecution. In Office of the Ombudsman v. De Sahagun, the Court held that the
period stated in Sec. 20 (5) of R.A. No. 6770, is not a prescription but discretion
of the Ombudsman to investigate a particular offense or not.
The provision is construed
as the permissive and operating to confer discretion. The Court consequently added;
where the words of a statute are clear, plain and free from ambiguity, they
must be given their literal meaning and applied without attempted
interpretation.”
That’s it. But worse, the November
11, 2012 decision of the Ombudsman after review by Dir. Virginia Palanca
Santiago, recommended for approval by Deputy Ombudsman Apostol to Ombudsman
Morales for signing (which the latter approved) has nearly put me in the brink
of insanity!
It reads; “The Information
accusing Jerry P. Trenas, Melchor Tan, Edwin Bravo, Catherine Tingson and Alex
Trinidad for Violation of Sec. 3, Par (e) of RA 3019 as amended, for causing
the release of the P43,807,733.33 for construction works of the ICHP in Pavia,
Iloilo, despite reports that substandard materials were used in the project and
defects, deficiencies and lapses in the works were NOTED, is hereby SET ASIDE.”
SET
ASIDE with nothing follows? This vague decision of the Ombudsman is what got me
so excited about. Sec. 26, of the Ombudsman Act of 1987 dictates; “the
Ombudsman shall receive complaints from any source in whatever form concerning
an official act or omission.
That
it shall act on the complaint immediately and if it finds the same entirely
baseless, it shall dismiss the same and inform the complainant of such
dismissal citing the reason thereof.” Yet they can’t find probable cause
against the mayor? Baloney!
Probable
cause needs only to rest on evidence showing that most likely than not, a crime
has been committed. It demands more than suspicion and requires less than
evidence that would justify indictment. The unauthorized payment of
P43,807,733.73 is already embraced in RA 3019!
This payment alone can
lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense had been
committed. So why not DISMISS the case if
it is baseless? Why only SET ASIDE? Are they aware of the consequences of this
decision arrived at?
The dangling of decision for
many years has created an impression without affirming the perception that the
Office of the Ombudsman is, although run by people with more knowledge of the
law, are human beings and prone to yield to temptation of greed!
Lowly Ombudsman employees
are most sorely tempted to steal but don’t. This story won’t easily go away. It
would only reinforced what we strongly believe. Deliberate or not, this injustice
to the taxpayers’ money has become a scroll that forms the basis of their…… see
the title !
No comments:
Post a Comment