In a five-page motion, Laurel said he received a copy of the Ombudsman’s resolution last March 21, the same day government prosecutors charged him in court.
Laurel, former chairman of the National Centennial Commission, said the act alone proved that government was bent on pinning him down by not giving him the chance to file an appeal.
"It deprived (me) of (my) statutory right to file a motion for reconsideration," he said.
Laurel said the Ombudsman’s action was a "serious irregularity" in the conduct of a preliminary investigation, which he has the right to undergo.
Laurel also asked the anti-graft court to "hold in abeyance" his trial on graft charges while his motion for reconsideration of the Ombudsman’s resolution is pending.
In a three-page comment, Ombudsman prosecutor Jesus Micael said Laurel failed to comply with the requisites for seeking an appeal after the case had already been filed in court, like the discovery of new evidence or that "errors of law have been committed." Micael said Laurel failed to cite any of these requisites in his motion and "merely stated he intends to raise serious novel and constitutional and legal issues" without mentioning any in particular. –Delon Porcalla