Ombudsman breaks silence on impeachment, says it's baseless

Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez broke her silence yesterday and said that the clamor for her impeachment is baseless since she never handled controversial cases, particularly the robbery/extortion charges that were filed against her former boss, then justice secretary Hernando Perez.

Gutierrez vowed to appeal before the Supreme Court the Sandiganbayan decision junking the graft and extortion complaint filed against Perez and three others in connection with the $2-million extortion case filed by former Manila congressman Mark Jimenez who, however, later withdrew his complaint.

“We will appeal the case before the Supreme Court. I am neither a friend of Perez nor being dictated upon by Malacañang. Why would I sit on the complaint and file a weak case? The evidence from Hong Kong and Switzerland are very strong,” Gutierrez told The STAR following the deliberation on the budget of her office at the Senate. The approval of the Ombudsman’s budget was deferred following criticisms against her office.

Several senators raised questions on the performance of the Ombudsman, tasked to investigate graft charges against former and current government personnel.

The senators assailed the agency for the delay in acting on the Perez case as well as the fertilizer fund scam involving former agriculture undersecretary Jocelyn “Jocjoc” Bolante and the national broadband network deal controversy involving the government and Chinese firm ZTE Corp.

Sen. Manuel Roxas II of the Liberal Party sought the impeachment of Gutierrez, while Senate President Pro Tempore Jinggoy Estrada, Senators Pia Cayetano, Francis Pangilinan, Francis Escudero and Richard Gordon said the inaction of the Ombudsman on the controversial cases is a setback to the country’s fight against corruption.

Other senators also linked Gutierrez to Malacañang since she is a former classmate of First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo and an appointee of President Arroyo. They also pointed out Gutierrez was a subordinate of Perez while they were both at the Department of Justice.

Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri said they decided not to tackle the Ombudsman’s budget without clarification on the issues raised against Gutierrez. Other departments and agencies breezed through the budget deliberations in plenary as the Senate was conducting marathon proceedings to finish the proposed General Appropriations Act before the congressional break on Dec. 22.

They said the Ombudsman was probably sitting on the cases deliberately so that the Sandiganbayan could dismiss the cases due to a technicality and thus protect her friends and Malacañang.

Gutierrez said all of these allegations against her were unfair since she had been resolving the cases she inherited from her predecessor, Simeon Marcelo.

She prepared a brief for the senators on the status of the controversial cases they cited and expressed hope that they would study all the information surrounding the cases before making conclusions.

In the case of Perez, Gutierrez said she was surprised with the resolution penned by Sandigabayan Second Division chairman Associate Justice Edilberto Sandoval favoring Perez despite the strong evidence against him.

Both Perez and Sandoval are from Batangas, Gutierrez said, but she refused to make any speculations on their relationship.

In his decision, Sandoval said the Ombudsman violated Perez’s constitutional right to speedy trial and dismissed the extortion and robbery charges against him.

“We are disputing the ruling because the Sandiganbayan considered the period of fact-finding investigation or case buildup in the counting of the period of preliminary investigation. Perez caused the delay in the resolution of the case because of the numerous dilatory pleadings filed and which had to be resolved first by the Office of the Ombudsman,” Gutierrez said.

Ironically, Gutierrez said the Third and Fourth Divisions of the Sandiganbayan did not find any inordinate delay in the resolution of the other cases her office filed against Perez.

Gutierrez said there were many complaints filed against Perez because of the evidence against him. The case filed before the Second Division involved only the alleged extortion by Perez of $2 million from Jimenez by intimidating the businessman with jail if he would not give the amount demanded.