That former police officer Rolando Mendoza complained about the inefficiency of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez highlights the need for Congress to re-examine the Ombudsman as an institution created by the Constitution and by law. While it is the 1987 Constitution that first created the Office of the Ombudsman, it is a mere law that gave the said office a monopoly in the filing of criminal information against government officials with a salary rank of Grade 27 and up. It is also a law that gave the Ombudsman the power to hear and decide administrative charges against all government employees. This appears to be redundant given that all line agencies, in conjunction with the Civil Service Commission, already have existing mechanisms to determine the fitness of individuals to occupy a public office.
The complaint of the bemedaled slain hostage-taker was that the Ombudsman was not acting seasonably to dismiss charges against him. He apparently considered these charges to be bereft of merit. The charge was supposedly filed by a chef from Manila Hotel who claimed to have been a victim of hulidap by Mendoza et. al. It was this charge, I understand, that led to his discharge from his office which then gave rise to his demand to be “reinstated into the service”.
In a press forum yesterday at the Rotary Center in Quezon City, journalists mentioned that the same charge against Mendoza had already been dismissed by the Internal Affairs Service of the Philippine National Police. Apparently, despite this dismissal, the matter is still being heard by the Office of the Ombudsman. I can only surmise that this is so because criminal charges against Mendoza must have been filed arising from the “hulidap” incident. In turn, the filing of every criminal charge in the Ombudsman comes with it an administrative charge which will determine whether the respondent should stay or be fired from his public office.
Not being a fan of the Ombudsman, I can only hope that Mendoza’s valid complaints against her will add much needed fire to the pending impeachment complaints against her now pending in Congress. But over and above the fitness of the Ombudsman to continue occupying such a sensitive post, the Mendoza incident ought at least to prompt our lawmakers to revisit the Ombudsman law. In particular, I submit three basic submissions on why the said law should be amended: to prevent similar paralysis in the Office where it is occupied by a virulently political person; two, to put the office at par with the National Prosecution Service; and three, to rationalize its administrative jurisdiction.
The Ombudsman was envisioned to be a super body that would have the power to promote honesty, efficiency, and transparency in government. Its powers are many and may in fact be rivaled only by the President himself. It has coercive powers to compel attendance and production of evidence, order the doing or to cease the doing any act, to investigate any case of ill gotten wealth, and even the power of contempt. Moreover, it has the power to file criminal information before the Sandiganbayan against public officers with a salary grade of 27 and up. It is this particular power that is hindered where the Ombudsman is seen to be more political than a legal institution. As seen in the case of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez who has admitted her personal closeness to the past dispensation, political loyalty could lead to wanton impunity owing to the Ombudsman’s avowed refusal to investigate her political benefactors. Perhaps, amendatory legislation is now necessary to address this inherent weakness. How? By vesting in the Executive, through the Department of Justice, the concurrent power to file these criminal Information with the Sandiganbayan. Had this been in place, there would have been no further need for P-Noy’s Truth Commission.
Secondly, in the conduct of preliminary investigation, the law should be amended to compel the Ombudsman to resolve all of its investigations within a non-extendible period of 90 days. In the Pestano case for murder, the Ombudsman took ten years to investigate the matter and at the end of its alleged investigation- only to dismiss the case. Why should the Ombudsman be allowed 10 years to determine the existence of probable cause where our public prosecutors will lose their entitlement to their salaries if they do not conclude with their investigations within 90 days? This was the crux of Mendoza’s gripes against the Ombudsman. The truth of the matter is that the Ombudsman is now notorious for sitting on cases for years with the result that once decent people, like Mendoza, have lost all hopes in our legal system precisely because of inordinate delays.
The final area for remedial legislation is the need to rationalize the exercise of the Ombudsman’s administrative jurisdiction. If the reports from the media are correct, Mendoza’s administrative case had already been dismissed by the Internal Affairs Service of the Philippine National Police. In other words, had it not been for the administrative investigation also being conducted by the Ombudsman, there would not have been a hindrance to his reinstatement into the service even without him resorting to the taking of hostages. It seems to me that legislation should be introduced either to vest in the Ombudsman the sole jurisdiction to determine the fitness of individuals to hold public office, or to grant this existing power to already existing agencies. In the case of the PNP, these bodies are the Internal Affairs Service or the National Police Commission. Certainly, we can understand the frustration of Mendoza when despite being cleared by the
IAS, the inaction of the Ombudsman has nonetheless prevented his reinstatement.
Nothing of course will justify what Mendoza did. Some good, though, should come out of this latest tragedy. Perhaps, the foregoing remedial legislation will be the good news resulting from the tragedy at Luneta.
Tama. kaya nagawa ni mendoza ang ganung krimen dahil inuupuan ng ombudsman ang kaso hindi lang kay mendoza marami pa. may patakaran nga so ombudsman na tinatawag na centralization ng kaso, ito yung lahat ng kaso ay dadaan kay gutierrez kaya lalong tumatagal ang kaso. kasi baka may makalusot na kaso ng kakampi at lumabas sa media mahirap ng bawiin kaya kailangan salain muna ni gutierrez. sabi nga ng isa sa deputy niya (gutierrez) “sa totoo lang ako nga hindi ko nababasa ang lahat ng kaso sa nasasakupan ko paano pa niyang (gutierrez) babasahin lahat ng kaso”.
ang isa pang masakit pinatagalna ng husto sa kalaunan babaluktutin din lang pala ang batas, yan ang ombudsman. narito ang mga naisampa kong reklamo:
• SPO1 Reynaldo Chai vs. Atty. Emilio Salumbides (Director NCR NAPOLCOM) – OMB-P-A-05-0485-D;
• Reynaldo Chai vs. P/SSUPT Joel Baloro – OMB-P-A-071252-K;
• Reynaldo Chai vs. Atty. Almazan (Ombudsman) – date filed February 6, 2008, no information to this date;
• Reynaldo Chai vs. P/CSUPT Varilla et. al. – OMB-P-A-08-0274-C;
• Reynaldo Chai vs. P/SSUPT Luis Saligumba – OMB-P-A-0275-C;
• Reynaldo Chai vs. P/SSUPT Henry Losanes et. al. – OMB-P-C-08-0274 and OMB-P-A-0869-C;
• Reynaldo Chai vs. P/SSUPT Atty. Daniel Macatlang – OMB-P-A-08-0276-C; at
• SPO1 Reynaldo Chai vs. Atty. Manuel Pontanal (Chief, LAS NAPOLCOM) – OMB-P-A-09-0193-B.
dahil matataas na tao ang sangkot dito panigurado magkakapera na naman ang ombudsman ako naman mamemeligro ang buhay. paano ilalaban ang kaso kapag wala kang panggastos? those who have less in life should have more in law – paano kaya ito mangyayari?
ang naiisip ng gobyerno ay bumuo ng elite composite force mula afp at pnp na gagapi sa hostage taker. lalong mapapabilis ang buhay ng hostage victim tandaan na malapit lang sa hostage taker ang kanyang mga biktima. news blackout – dito papasok ang kasabihan na “labo muna bago linaw” at lalong aabuso ang otoridad.
Salamat sa malinaw mong mga ideya!
The DoJ is also a political body and the NPS under its jurisdiction. They are no different to the Office of the Ombudsman in terms of institutional structure.
The DoJ secretary is also a presidential appointee, often co-terminus with the President.
The chief state prosecutor of the NPS and all its personnel is under the control and supervision of the DoJ secretary.
We have a case wherein a prosecutor whom we had filed administrative charges for bringing court documents home and lose some of them.
The DoJ secretary informs the the executive secretary in a letter of its suspension order on the prosecutor involved.
And, in all cases where there are questions to the merits on determining “probable cause”, it is the DoJ secretary who has the final say before it can be filed in court for prosecution.
That’s why the DOJ should have the power too to file criminal information in court
tama rin na hindi na kailangan ang truth commission kung nagta-trabaho ng maayos ang ombudsman. ang masaklap hindi naman kapareho ng power ang ombudsman at truth commission, mas makamandag ang ombudsman. isa nga sa inereklamo ko sa ombudsman ay mismong taga ombudsman (atty. almazan) na magpahanggang sa ngayon ay walang nangayri. kung may maitutulong ako para sa pagkakatanggal ni ombudsman ay nakahanda akong humarap sa kahit anong imbestigasyon. may mga papel ako na binaboy ng ombudsman ang mga batas bukod pa sa kawalang aksiyon o inupuan na mga reklamo. kanina napanood ko si pnoy sa tv4 hinggil sa pagbabanta ni tsgt palencia na gagayahin si mendoza. ang sabi ni pnoy dapat dumaan sa proseso ang lahat. ang hinihingi ni palencia ay 1988 – 1994 na benepisyo sa broken service nya, ito ang proseso maghintay hanggang makalimutan na lang. kapag tinotoo ni palencia ang banta masisi ba natin siya, buti na lang marunong pang magbanta.
Kaunti lang ingat when you write about Malacanang.
Malacanang threatens “Libel!!!” Seriously. Lacierda threatens libel against a Tribune reporter.
From the Tribute:
“But today, as Noynoy and his spokesman Lacierda, along with their incompetent yellows are in power and position, they not only reject critical reports and commentaries, especially from the Tribune, but even go to the extent of threatening our Malacañang reporter with a libel suit, asking her when she would have a job change and even asking for the Tribune’s status, claiming too that the Tribune reports are editorialized, all of which is really none of his business. And if Noynoy is included in this, it is because Lacierda is his spokesman, and what he says necessarily reflects Noynoy’s stance toward our newspaper.
Neither Nonoy, nor Lacierda, nor any of all those allied with Noynoy — including his yellow media — has a right to tell the Tribune how to run the paper, and how stories should be written up.”
http://www.tribuneonline.org/commentary/20100903com2.html
Sad that history appears to be repeating itself. Hopefully, its just Lacierda!
I had that same feeling that Mendoza was innocent of the charges. Why would a man desperate enough to take hostage to get his job back. He did it with a stunt pomp and publicity with tragic end.
And the goods that came out of this fiasco are:
1. The peryodistas remain idiots and idioting the Filipinos. Their brains are only wired for political analysis. Nothing more.
2. The inherent inferior forensic investigation. Ampatuan would be happy except to those idiots who are already poisoned by idiot peryodistas. THINK BLAGO! If Ampatuan were tried in America, the jurors will laughing hard at Filipinos and their foreign-educated-ivy-school Filipino lawyers. Filipinos sure has learning disabilities
3. That benign0 Aquino is stupid. Of course, depends on whose side they are.
4. That peryodistas are irresponsible. they are only responsible when it comes to their clique like Ces Drilon kidnapping news blackout which was obviously stupid. NOT ONE FOREIGN-EDUCATED IVY-SCHOOL FILIPINO LAWYERING GRADUATE ABROAD EVEN LAUGHED AT THE FESTIVE IGNORANCE.
… 5. That no one in the world trusts Filipino investigations, even high-school dropout Manny Pacquiao hired white lawyers in AMerica than hire ivy-school-grduate Filipino lawyers.
Puno is lobbying “WHATEVER HAPPENED IN MANILA STAYS IN MANILA” to protect his patron saint Benign0. But Benign0 and Puno is quandary. If Vegas Quote holds true, therefore Ampatuan can have Vegas defense, too, on top of inherent bungling forensics.