Desierto committed grave abuse of discretion - SC

The Supreme Court has ruled that former Ombudsman Aniano Desierto committed grave abuse of discretion when he insisted on pursuing the criminal case filed before the Sandiganbayan against a top official of the Philippine National Bank in Cebu.

Cayetano Tejano Jr., the vice president and manager of PNB-Cebu branch, had convinced the High Tribunal that Desierto had committed grave abuse of discretion when the Ombudsman refused to approve the recommendation of his investigators for the dismissal of his case.

Records of the case showed that Desierto had participated in the initial preliminary investigation of the case when he was still a special prosecutor of the Ombudsman in 1994 where his recommendation was to indict Tejano before the anti-graft court.

"We agree with the petitioner. Steadfastly, we have ruled that the officer who reviews a case on appeal should not be the same person whose decision is under review," the SC second division ruled in a decision penned by associate justice Minita Chico-Nazario.

Tejano was earlier investigated by the Visayas Ombudsman and was found liable for allowing the withdrawal of P2.2 million, and charging the amount from the account of V & G Better Homes subdivision based in Consolacion, Cebu despite that the depositor had only P33,436.78 in deposits with the bank.

It was stated that upon Tejano's order, cashier III Juanito Mata took P2.2 million from bank cashier Jane Jecong at shortly before noon of July 20, 1992 and turned them over to Tejano. At about noontime of the same day, Mata gave Jecong a pre-signed withdrawal slip for the P2.2 million - but its date was July 21, 1992 and it was charged against the account of V & G subdivision.

Jecong was told that the withdrawal slip would already serve as replacement of the P2.2 million withdrawn from her, and at the same time serve as cash-on-hand at the end of the day's transaction because Tejano approved it.

The records of the case, however, showed that the P2.2 million withdrawn from the bank reportedly taken from the account of V & G subdivision was also returned later in the afternoon.

While the case had already reached the Sandiganbayan, the anti-graft court granted Tejano's request for a reinvestigation and was assigned to Special Prosecution officer III Jesus Micael who was convinced that no probable cause existed to indict petitioner Tejano of the case.

Deputy special prosecutor Robert Kallos approved Micael's recommendation and was concurred with by special prosecutor Leonardo Tamayo. But when such reached Desierto's table on 1999, Desierto, who earlier participated in the initial preliminary investigation as special prosecutor, disapproved the recommendation for the dismissal of the case with the marginal note "assign the case to another prosecutor to prosecute the case aggressively."

The SC ruling said, "In order that the review of the decision of a subordinate officer might not turn out to be farce, the reviewing officer must perforce be other than the officer whose decision is under review. Otherwise, there could be no different view or there would be no real review of the case."

It also ordered that the records of the case be remanded to the Office of the Ombudsman for further proceedings. - Rene U. Borromeo