‘Sacked Sandigan justice tried to influence SC’

MANILA, Philippines - Supreme Court Associate Justice Marvic Leonen bared yesterday that dismissed Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Gregory Ong tried to make a last ditch effort to influence the SC justices before a majority decided to dismiss him last week.

In his 38-page concurring opinion, Leonen revealed that Ong attempted to informally circulate a letter through colleagues in the SC that he was willing to take optional retirement should he be meted with any kind of suspension.

Leonen, who voted with seven other magistrates for the dismissal of Ong, believed that such act could be considered “influence peddling” and was “wrong.”

“That (Ong) had the audacity to try to influence the members of the court by offering to resign through an informal letter circulated through some colleagues is in my view could have been another basis for his dismissal,” Leonen stressed.

“It shows that he has at least made attempts to communicate ex parte (from a party) with members of this court outside the formal processes allowed by our rules,” Leonen pointed out.

Because of Ong’s action, Leonen urged his colleagues in the high tribunal to practice their constitutional duty to discipline judges and justices of lower courts and “properly call out an attempt to illicitly influence this court when it happens.”

In its ruling last week, the SC ordered the immediate dismissal from judicial service of Ong following a fact-finding report that he met with alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles twice at her office after he voted for her acquittal in a malversation through falsification of public documents case involving the sale in 1998 of 500 Kevlar helmets to the Philippine Marines.

Apart from the extreme penalty of dismissal from the service, the high court also imposed on Ong forfeiture of retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, and with perpetual disqualification from reemployment in government service.

The SC upheld key recommendations of retired SC Associate Justice Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez after a fact-finding investigation.

Ong was the first justice of the anti-graft court, which handles cases against corrupt and erring government officials, to be dismissed.

Leonen said this case “defines (the court’s) collective commitment to strictly enforce our own canons of judicial ethics.”

The seven other magistrates in the majority ruling were Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio and Associate Justices Arturo Brion, Mariano del Castillo, Martin Villarama Jr., Estela Perlas-Bernabe and Francis Jardeleza. 

The dismissal order was immediately executory. But it was clarified that Ong could still file an appeal.

Associate Justices Teresita Leonardo-de Castro and Diosdado Peralta took no part in the voting since they were both colleagues of Ong in the Sandiganbayan prior to their appointment to the SC.

However, the five other members of the high court – Associate Justices Presbitero Velasco Jr., Lucas Bersamin, Jose Perez, Jose Mendoza and Bienvenido Reyes – had a different view on Ong’s case.

In their separate opinions, they agreed with the findings of the majority that Ong violated the New Code of Judicial Conduct in meeting with Napoles.

But they believed that it was just simple misconduct punishable by suspension for three months without pay.

“It is my considered opinion that Justice Ong’s association with Napoles only constitutes simple misconduct. Unlike the case of fraternization between judges and litigants with still pending cases, there is no rule of ethics that categorically prohibits and sanctions fraternization between judges and their former litigants,” Perez explained in his 24-page opinion.

“Cases of fraternization between judges and their former litigants may still be held unethical if found to be done for a corrupt purpose or in such manner that violates any of the norms of propriety and integrity that every member of the bench ought to possess. The ethical implications of fraternizations between judges and their former litigants, therefore, must be evaluated on a case-to-case basis,” he added.

Bersamin, for his part, wanted the court to consider “mitigating circumstances” in determining the proper penalty against Ong.

Voting 8-5 with two abstentions, the SC found him guilty of gross misconduct, dishonesty, and impropriety, for his links to Napoles.

Ong did not report for work or at least show up and talk to other magistrates since his dismissal, officials and employees of the anti-graft court yesterday.

His absence also caused the postponement of a hearing on the national broadband network (NBN) deal graft case against former President and now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

Ombudsman prosecutors were supposed to continue their presentation of evidence on the NBN case but the hearings were reset to October 20 and 21. – With Michael Punongbayan