Pimentel, ex-SC justice back Ombudsman memo

CEBU CITY — The memorandum of Deputy Ombudsman-Visayas Primo Miro on selective disclosure of information appears to be winning the fight of reporters for transparency.

Two members of the Judicial and Bar Council, which named Miro to the post with much controversy, affirmed the anti-graft office’s rule on confidentiality.

Both Sen. Aquilino Pimentel and retired Supreme Court Justice Regino Hermosisima said the policy to limit media access to documents is based on existing Ombudsman rules.

"I have always stood for press freedom. Pero ang media ila pong lantawon nga ang pag-publikar maka-create sa impression sa huna-huna sa katawhan nga kanang tawhana dautan bisan ug wala pay findings sa Ombudsman (Media should also consider that the publication of a story would create an impression that the person involved is already guilty although the findings have yet to come out)," said Pimentel, an ex-officio member of the JBC.

The first to come to Miro’s aid was Ombudsman Aniano Desierto who said that although he has yet to review the memorandum, there appears to be nothing questionable about it.

Desierto said the restriction is well within the prerogatives of the newly-appointed deputy ombudsman.

Hermosisima, a regular member of the JBC, shares Pimentel’s views on the issue.

"I can’t make an opinion on the legality of that pero dunay balaod ana. Sa dili pa mo-file, dili sa ibutyag kay prejudicial sa akusado if he’s innocent," Hermosisima said.

Days after he took over as Deputy Ombudsman-Visayas, Miro designated special prosecutor Estella Alma Singco as public information officer.

Singco told reporters she had to confer with Miro to determine the extent of the release of documents.

She said Miro is merely implementing an old policy of the Office of the Ombudsman.

Singco cited an order issued by former Ombudsman Conrado Vasquez in 1993 which states that "no information will be given and/or furnished to anybody as to the status and assignment of cases pending in this Office as well as any information, the disclosure of which is prohibited by law."

In 1996, Desierto required written requests before any document on pending cases could be released.

Singco said another memorandum was issued last year, stressing confidentiality of documents and records under review by the anti-graft office.

Section 15 of the Ombudsman Act mandates that the office publicize matters covered by its investigation when circumstances warrant it and with due prudence.

However, the Ombudsman is also empowered to determine what cases may or may not be made public.

Employees of the Ombudsman, who violate the rule on confidentiality, will be subject to investigation and administrative charges.

"We can only release resolutions which are actionable by the deputy ombudsman, excluding those which have yet to be forwarded to Manila. The release of documents during an inquiry might prejudice or preempt the investigation," Singco said.

Lawyer Gloria Lastimosa-Dalawampu, who acts as the legal counsel of the reporters, met with Miro on a possible compromise.

Miro, through Dalawampu, requested the media to give him a little space, saying he is still in the process of orienting himself with the functions of his office.

He assured reporters that he is willing to accommodate their suggestions.

"I will relay the concerns of reporters to the deputy ombudsman but it is ultimately his option to decide. Let’s give him that prerogative as the head of the office," Singco said.

Reporters are asking for access to complaints or even a list of cases filed during the day.

The reporters said it will be impossible to determine which cases they have to follow up if they are not aware of the complaints filed. — Freeman News Service