|
WHY the
thunderous silence from the Ombudsman?
This was
the question of former Solicitor General Frank Chavez on
Monday as he asked the Supreme Court to compel the
Office of the Ombudsman to expedite the resolution of
the four plunder complaints he filed against President
Arroyo and several government officials, including those
involved in the so-called P2.8-billion fertilizer scam
in 2004.
In a
petition for mandamus, Chavez said it has been more than
three years since he filed the charges, and yet
Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez has yet to act on them.
“The only notable action taken by the Ombudsman on the
scandalous plunder of public funds, involving no less
than P3.3 billion of taxpayers’ money, is a deafening
but strange silence. And the silence and inaction
continue to this very day.”
He had
filed plunder charges against former Agriculture
Undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-Joc” Bolante, who had fled
abroad, involving the fertilizer fund scam; one for the
plunder of the Overseas Workers’ Welfare Administration
funds amounting to P200 million; and another for the
illegal use and release of government funds, medicine,
rice and cash in the so-called “Oplan Mercury.”
The
petitioner claimed that on April 11, 2006, he filed a
motion with the Office of the Ombudsman to require the
respondents in the fertilizer-fund scam case to submit
their counteraffidavits to speed up the probe.
“Records
of the Office of the Ombudsman will show that during the
entire pendency of this complaint, complainant has sent
a series of letters to the Office of the Ombudsman
following up and pushing for the investigation into this
charge and the eventual requirement of respondents to
file their counteraffidavits.”
Chavez
said aside from Bolante, named respondents in the case
were President Arroyo, former-Budget Secretary Emilia
Boncodin, and several other government officials.
He
alleged the President and other top government officials
diverted funds of the Department of Agriculture for the
Ginintuang Masaganang Ani to her campaign kitty and
those of her allies.
In the
“Oplan Mercury” case, Chavez filed plunder charges
against Mrs. Arroyo, Dodie Limcaoco, Agriculture
Secretary Arthur Yap, Luis Lorenzo Jr., Ephraim Genuino,
and former-Health Secretary Manuel Dayrit for the
alleged conversion of P200 million in government funds
to boost the campaign chest of Mrs. Arroyo in the 2004
presidential race.
On July
20, 2004 Chavez filed a plunder complaint against Mrs.
Arroyo, Virgilio Angelo, Francisco Duque III and Foreign
Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo for alleged use and
disbursements of the so-called OWWA funds.
In his
petition for mandamus, Chavez noted that after filing
the complaints for plunder, he learned that
then-Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo had endorsed the
complaints to the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon.
When
Chavez followed up on his complaint on September 2,
2004, the Office of the Ombudsman told him that it was
still pending. A year after, Chavez said he was informed
by the Office of the Ombudsman that the complaints were
still pending and that the respondents have not yet
submitted their respective counteraffidavits.
On
December 12, 2005, Chavez learned from the Office of the
Ombudsman the complaints were returned to the Central
Office following the resignation of Marcelo.
Chavez
then wrote Sen. Ramon Magsaysay Jr. on February 3, 2006,
asking for the Senate’s help in compelling the Office of
the Ombudsman to expedite the investigation into his
plunder complaints.
In
reply, Magsaysay assured Chavez in a letter dated
February 8, 2006, that the Senate Agriculture Committee
“will exercise its oversight functions to the fullest to
ensure that the Ombudsman or any constitutional entity
for that matter would perform their mandated duties
without fear or favor.”
The
Senate eventually conducted six public hearings into the
fertilizer fund scam in 2005 and 2006.
A copy
of the Senate committee report was then sent to the
Office of the Ombudsman. To this date, however, the
Office of the Ombudsman has yet to act on his motion,
Chavez said.
“It is
clear from the foregoing disquisition that respondent
Ombudsman has abdicated her duties; abandoned her
mandate as protector of the people; is derelict in her
duties; and, refused to discharge her functions mandated
not only by the statues but the Constitution as well,”
said Chavez.
“Petitioner respectfully submits that respondent’s
inaction and refusal to act in the premises give rise to
actionable omission that can be compelled by the writ of
mandamus,” he added in asking the Court to direct
Gutierrez to resolve these pending cases within a month.
|
