The Ombudsman Case of Gov. Tupas

Hole of Justice

By Peter G. Jimenea
 
The Ombudsman Case of Gov. Tupas
 

A case for Violation of R.A. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) was filed in the Office of the Ombudsman against then Iloilo Gov.  Niel Tupas in 2004.

 By that time, the Iloilo Airport of International Standards is undergoing construction and the need for sand and gravel is a must.  Applicants for the contract to supply the above needs are in queue at the Capitol.

But the lucky awardee to quarry the above items in the Municipality of Maasin, surprisingly waive his right just after only one year in favor of the father-in-law of now Vice Governor Raul ‘Boboy’ Tupas.

On how the case has risen from that transfer of right to quarry, we have yet to know about the details. But as easily noticed, it is about money on why the governor was slapped with that case at the Office of the Ombudsman.

But that is not only what we are looking for. The case filed against then Gov. Tupas seems to have disappeared in the course of time. We heard nothing more after it was reported to have been filed already.

It holds true why Ilonggo lawyer Atty. Romeo Gerochi calls the office of the Ombudsman “Office of Monalisa.” The song Monalisa claims many dreams of obsessed men have been brought to her doorstep, but they just lie there and they die there!

Surprisingly, the case filed in 2004, suddenly resurrected in 2014. The governor was ordered by the Ombudsman to file his counter-affidavit. My goodness, I don’t think this Ombudsman business is all about!

In Rafael L. Coscolluela, Petitioner, v. Sandiganbayan First Division and People of the Philippines, Respondents, a complaint filed at the Office of the Ombudsman in 2001 was acted and filed at the Sandiganbayan only in 2009.  (G.R. No. 191411, July 15, 2014)

On July 9, 2009, Coscolluela filed a Motion to Quash,12 arguing, among others, that his constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases was violated as the criminal charges against him were resolved only after almost eight (8) years since the complaint was instituted.

The Court Ruled that the petition is meritorious. A person’s right to the speedy disposition of his case is guaranteed under Section 16, Article III of the 1987 Philippine Constitution (Constitution) which provides:

SEC. 16. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative bodies. This right is not limited to the accused in criminal proceedings but extends to all parties in all cases.

Be it civil or administrative in nature, as well as all proceedings, either judicial or quasi-judicial. In this accord, any party to a case may demand expeditious action to all officials who are tasked with administration of justice.

This is what got me so excited about. The case of Coscolluela stayed for eight (8) years only while the one in Gov. Niel D. Tupas has slept for ten (10) years in the Office of Mona... ehe, este Office of the Ombudsman. The law says “it is not the accused’s duty to follow up the prosecution of his case. It is the duty of the State!

I think this case will end into a Stare Decisis – Court stands firmly by things that have been decided on cases with similar facts and have been resolved in the past. Well, I hope to have made your day in this column. Monalisa has asked for it, unlike Dirty Harry and me who ask others to make our day!

Hole of Justice: The Judge

Hole of Justice: The Judge: Hole of Justice By Peter G. Jimenea   The Judge’s Verdict Few years ago, a Filipino-Chinese businessman, his wife and young ...

Hole of Justice: The Judge

Hole of Justice: The Judge: Hole of Justice By Peter G. Jimenea   The Judge’s Verdict Few years ago, a Filipino-Chinese businessman, his wife and young ...

Hole of Justice: The Judge

Hole of Justice: The Judge: Hole of Justice By Peter G. Jimenea   The Judge’s Verdict Few years ago, a Filipino-Chinese businessman, his wife and young ...

Hole of Justice: The Judge

Hole of Justice: The Judge: Hole of Justice By Peter G. Jimenea   The Judge’s Verdict Few years ago, a Filipino-Chinese businessman, his wife and young ...

Hole of Justice: The Judge

Hole of Justice: The Judge: Hole of Justice By Peter G. Jimenea   The Judge’s Verdict Few years ago, a Filipino-Chinese businessman, his wife and young ...

The Judge

Hole of Justice

By Peter G. Jimenea
 

The Judge’s Verdict

Few years ago, a Filipino-Chinese businessman, his wife and young daughter were found murdered in their-mansion at General Luna Street, Iloilo City. The police claimed no sign of forced entry or theft as motive of the crime.

In an interview with the Iloilo City police chief, he disclosed it was an inside job by culprits who knew their way around the house. The sad part of this story is the room where they were found dead seems to have been mopped up to cover the crime.

From the few bloodstains found inside the house, the investigator knew they were killed there. But the place had been scrupulously cleaned-up and dried out with traces of mopping in every corner.

The police theorized the prime suspects in this Filipino-Chinese case are his two sons. According to the chief, the eldest son during interview by investigators had been acting like high on drugs. He even told him that his idols are Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussien!

As prime suspects in the gruesome murder the brothers were arrested and sent to jail. The RTC Judge hearing the case recommended no bail for them. But with the help of their grandmother who hired a popular lawyer from Manila, the case was appealed.

It was eventually reversed by the Court of Appeals (CA) and the accused were granted bail for temporary liberty. Due to such result, we cannot easily dispel the erroneous public suspicion that money talks to mitigate the murder case into homicide.

What’s more, by that time the Court of Appeals had a bad reputation due to the issue of TRO for sale! This bad image of CA justices is a story that won’t go away You didn’t see but even in jail people with money have different treatment than you and me!

Elevating a grievance to the court for redress is a privilege for the poor litigants that sometimes, judicial remedies are subject to “use” “over-use,” “misuse” or “abuse.” Oh my God, lowly Court employees are most sorely tempted to accept bribe but don’t!

A heart-breaking point in this children’s motive to kill their parents is a wanton desire for money. A childless Chinese businessman and his Filipina wife adopted a boy who later killed his Chinese businessman-father when they argued about money.

But the Filipina wife developed her love to the grown up boy as a real son that she decided to protect him by cleaning up the room with bloodstains and the police were surprised how the room where the Chinese businessman was shot in the mouth by his adopted son was in proper order.

The worse happened when this killer son and the two suspect-brothers in the gruesome death of their father, step-mother and half-sister became buddies. It is widely believed that they learned from him the style of clearing the murder-scene before the police arrive.

In its ruling of 2010, the Supreme Court set aside the CA’s resolution and upheld the RTC judge’s decision of no-bail. The brothers were not able to flee and were sent back to jail while the case is being heard. But the grandmother did not stop looking for remedies to save her two grandsons.

Just few days ago, I was shocked to hear that the brothers were exonerated by the trial judge hearing the case. I am sure the police director who ordered the thorough investigation of the case will be stunned too, upon hearing this result.

But as the law says, Courts have prerogative to relax procedural rules of even the most mandatory character. Not only that, the Court has also a discretion to dismiss or not as a power not duty. For a judge, it is always safer in acquitting than in punishing. (Pp vs. Lizada, 225 SCRA 708).