Ombudsman to Court of Appeals: Reverse Garcia, Bolo’s acquittal
CEBU, Philippines - The Office of the Ombudsman is asking the Court of Appeals to reverse its ruling acquitting former Cebu governor Gwendolyn Garcia and former Provincial board member Juan Bolo of grave misconduct because of the Aguinaldo doctrine.
“The Office of the Ombudsman is in agreement that the Aguinaldo doctrine is applicable but disagrees with petitioner as to its effect. The Office of the Ombudsman maintains that administrative adjudication is not precluded, and a finding of guilt is even necessary, for condonation to exist,†read a 13-page motion for reconsideration submitted by the anti-graft body.
The appellate court acquitted Garcia and Bolo of grave misconduct in relation to the Capitol’s purchase of the controversial Balili property in the City ofNaga, citing the Aguinaldo doctrine.
According to the court, Garcia could not be held administratively guilty of the charge because of her re-election while Bolo was also no longer in government service. On January 9, 2013, the Office of the Ombudsman found Garcia, Bolo, provincial assessor Anthony Sususco, provincial treasurer Roy Salubre, provincial engineer Eulogio Pelayre, and budget officer Emme Gingoyon guilty of grave misconduct.
“The Aguinaldo doctrine simply means that the re-election to office operates as a condonation of the officer’s previous misconduct to the extent of cutting off the right to remove him therefor. It is respectfully submitted that the phrase ‘cutting off the right to remove’ pertains only to respondent office’s power to impose the corresponding penalty and not its power to investigate,†the motion read.
“Although present Philippine jurisprudence presumes that the electorate has full knowledge of the life and character of the elected official including his past misconduct, such presumption is valid only if the electorate knew of the illegality of the act,†the anti-graft office argued.
“How can the electorate expected to know of its illegality if no such finding of its illegality exists?†the Ombudsman asked.
The motion was signed by Assistant Ombudsman Maribeth Taytayon-Padios and graft investigation and prosecution officer I Claudette Agatep-Granville. The Office of the Ombudsman asked the CA to reinstate its January 9, 2013 decision.
Complainant Crisologo Saavedra, in a separate motion for reconsideration, assailed the decision of the court. Saavedra said the application of the Aguinaldo doctrine is unconstitutional.
“The doctrine of condonation is judicial legislation and therefore unconstitutional because it violates the power of Congress to make laws under Article IV, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines,†Crisologo argued.
He said that the Cebuanos who voted to re-elect Garcia in 2010 “cannot be assumed to have know-ledge of the grave misconduct committed by Garcia.†Saavedra said that without such knowledge, the electorate cannot be assumed to have condoned such misconduct.
The Capitol during Garcia’s administration bought the 249,246-square-meter Balili property in Barangay Tinaan, City of Naga. A large portion of the property was later found to be submerged in seawater. — (FREEMAN)
- Latest
