A Whiff Of Fresh Air At The Office Of The Ombudsman

BY Fr. Ranhilio Callangan Aquino, September 25, 2018

JUSTICE Samuel Martires, newly appointed Ombudsman, is shaking things up at the Office
of the Ombudsman, and one surely welcome development is letting in some fresh air.

He has ordered a review of cases precipitously filed in court, the dismissal of long pending but
still unresolved cases, and has demanded of graft investigators more exacting standards of
proof when the harsh penalty of dismissal is meted out, with its attendant ancillary penalties
of forfeiture of benefits, cancellation of eligibility and perpetual disqualification from public
office. In fact, as a member of the ConCom, I convinced my colleagues to include within the
provisions on the Ombudsman the requirement that this most severe penalty that denies a
retiree of all he had ever counted on to see him through the last years of life be inflicted only
on the basis of clear and convincing evidence — rejecting the prevailing rule that substantial
evidence suffices!

The Ombudsman has, through the years, acquired the reputation of being “el castigador del
pais” or the punisher of the nation. That was not always so, and that is probably not the most
helpful role of the Ombudsman. In its origins, the Office of the Ombudsman was “sumbungan
ng bayan,” to whom citizens could turn with their gripes and grievances. It was not necessary
for him to wield flail and whip. It was rather for him to goad other offices of government into
salutary action.

It is regrettably the punitive function of the Ombudsman that has come to characterize it —
but the trouble with punishment is that it is always reactive. It comes after the fact. And it
always deals with a particular offender. Seldom does it ever address a systemic malady, a
syndrome, the deterrence argument notwithstanding. And because of this obsession with
crime and punishment, offense and just deserts there is a very important mandate that the
Constitution gives the Office of the Ombudsman that has been eclipsed.

Section 13, Article XI of the Constitution, assigns the Ombudsman this task:

7) Determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, mismanagement, fraud, and corruption in
the government and make recommendations for their elimination and the observance of high
standards of ethics and efficiency.

While the civil service has a sustained campaign against the nefariousness of red tape, this
duty of the Ombudsman has been all but overlooked. Ironically, it should be one of the most
effective means of dealing with official ineptitude, inefficiency and corruption. The search for
causes is notoriously difficult, that is why Aristotle elevated it to the rank of a science: knowing
a thing through its causes. But that it is necessary will not be doubted. Symptoms can be dealt
with and dangerously repressed even, but until the cause has been found, the malady may
prove to be debilitating, if not fatal.

The Ombudsman is called upon by the fundamental law of the land to be engaged in nothing
less than scientific study — evidence-based (and this goes beyond the evidence that the Rules
of Court deal with to the kind of evidence that goes into empirical research). The Ombudsman
therefore does not need lawyers only. It needs social scientists, organization experts and
public administration specialists. And then it must engage offices, departments and agencies

Page 1 of 8
of government in that pedagogical and dialogical process by which shortcomings are pointed
out and processes are critically reviewed.

It is of course the easier thing to receive complaint affidavits and then vex respondents, no
matter that the complaints may be patently unmeritorious, riddle them with anxiety and fill their
days with the preparation of counter-affidavits and position papers. It is the more challenging
task to be pro-active, to be involved in that science that seeks out causes of inefficiency,
mismanagement, unnecessary delay and corruption.

It is a common mistake, exacerbated by past practice and uncalled for hospitality to

harassment complaints to deal with all “errors” as “misconduct,” if not “crimes.” A mistaken
entry in a SALN is not necessarily a crime, not even an administrative offense. In fact, it can
and should be corrected, and the law allows for its correction. This is of course a different
matter from the non-submission of a SALN that the law requires. Mistakes in the compliance
with the many frankly crazy provisions of the procurement law do not necessarily bespeak of
malice or criminal intent. If any, they suggest that many provisions of that law are
unreasonable, and that it takes some time to master its convoluted passages and find one’s
way through them — or around them!

Justice Sam is a wise man. And a man of prayer is never refused light from on high, as he is
shielded from the distracting noise from below. I have utterly no doubt that during his watch
and under his stewardship, the Ombudsman will be less the “castigador del pais” and more its
“gabay.”

https://www.manilatimes.net/a-whiff-of-fresh-air-at-the-office-of-the-ombudsman/444906/

Page 2 of 8
Ombudsman Martires To Speed Up Resolution Of Cases
Elizabeth Marcelo (The Philippine Star) - August 7, 2018 - 12:00am

MANILA, Philippines — On his first day in office yesterday, Ombudsman Samuel Martires
vowed to institute reforms in the anti-graft agency, among them the dismissal of all cases
pending fact-finding investigation for more than a year.

“There will be an inventory of cases undergoing fact-finding investigation. I will be issuing an

order dismissing the cases that are undergoing fact-finding investigation for more than a year,
without prejudice to the refiling of these cases,” Martires told members of the House of
Representatives committee on appropriations yesterday during the hearing of the Office of the
Ombudsman’s P2.885-million proposed budget for 2019.

Martires said he will issue the order today or within the week. He explained the measure is in
line with the ombudsman’s aim to limit the number of cases being dismissed by the anti-graft
court Sandiganbayan due to “inordinate delay” in investigation.

Martires told the House panel that the Sandiganbayan dismissed more than 135 cases in
recent years on the ground of “inordinate delay,” tantamount to violation of the constitutional
right to speedy disposition of case of the accused.

In a chance interview with reporters, Martires explained that while the Supreme Court issued
a ruling on July 31 revising the rules on inordinate delay, such ruling is prospective or
applicable in succeeding complaints to be filed with the ombudsman.

“The cases long pending at the ombudsman will still be covered by the previous inordinate
delay doctrine... So, let us dismiss the pending cases under fact-finding investigation without
prejudice to refiling,” Martires said.

In its July 31 ruling, the SC sided with the position of the ombudsman that the reckoning period
for the right to speedy trial does not start with the fact-finding investigation or the evidence-
gathering stage, but with the formal preliminary investigation.

At yesterday’s hearing, Martires told the lawmakers that he will also order a shorter period of
preliminary investigation.

“We will give every investigator only 90 days, unless for compelling or justifiable reasons that
there is a need to extend the period of preliminary investigation. In no case will a preliminary
investigation be more than one year,” Martires said.

“I also intend to centralize all preliminary investigations such that the investigating prosecutor
will also be the trial prosecutor, so he would know how to build up this case,” he added.

https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2018/08/07/1840341/ombudsman-martires-speed-
resolution-cases

Page 3 of 8
Martires To Junk All Cases That Take Over A Year At Fact Finding

MANILA, Philippines – Big changes are coming to the Office of the Ombudsman.

Ombudsman Samuel Martires’ first major action will be to dismiss all cases that are still
undergoing fact-finding investigation after more than a year.

During the Ombudsman’s budget hearing at the House of Representatives on Monday, August
6, Martires said, “probably tomorrow" he will be issuing an order to dismiss these cases
"without prejudice" to possible refiling.

This move is intended to provide a clean slate for the Office of the Ombudsman, which has
lost hundreds of cases due to inordinate delay.

Complainants can refile the same cases with a clean docket. Moving forward, Martires said
he will strictly implement measures that would ensure speedy disposition.

“We will shorten the period of preliminary investigations. We will give investigators a period of
90 days….I promise you all motions for reconsideration must be resolved within a period of
60 days. Anything beyond 60 days, the investigation officers must explain why it took him more
than 60 days to resolve the motion,” Martires said.

Martires added that no case will be spared, even if investigators justify why it's taken so long,
or prove that it's near completion.

“I have to be firm in my decision to dismiss these cases,” Martires said.

Parking fee

The Office is currently investigating allegations that a parking fee is being paid by defendants
to investigators – for them to sit on cases, with the end goal of getting them dismissed by the
court due to inordinate delay.

Bayan Muna Representative Carlos Zarate pointed out that if Martires dismisses the one-year-
old cases, those who paid a parking fee would have succeeded.

Martires said that on the contrary, dismissing the cases would help smoke out the corrupt
investigators.

“'Yung tumanggap magsimula nang maghandang magbalik ng pera, kasi unti-unti na naming
makikita ito eh (Those who received money should start to prepare to return the money
because we will discover this bit by bit),” Martires said.

Major overhaul

Cases first go through the fact-finding phase, after which the fact-finding investigators file a
criminal complaint for preliminary investigation. Only during preliminary investigation do the
proceedings become criminal in nature.

Page 4 of 8
When the Ombudsman approves the charges, that’s the only time when prosecutors come in
to fight the cases and try to win them in court.

Special Prosecutor Edilberto Sandoval earlier said there is a disconnect between investigators
and prosecutors, such that prosecutors sometimes end up defending a case they do not
believe in.

Martires has an answer to this: a major overhaul for the office.

“I also intend to centralize all preliminary investigations so that the investigating prosecutors
will also be the trial prosecutors so that he would know how to build up his case,” Martires
said.

Having different sets of investigators and prosecutors is, however, a check-and-balance

mechanism. It’s also designed that way so defendants who look to bribe investigators cannot
buy off just one set of people.

‘Top-heavy’

Martires said he will also restructure the Office of the Ombudsman in a way that will affect the
deputies.

In the current setup, there is an Overall Deputy Ombudsman, Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon,
Visayas, Mindanao, and Military, and then there are Assistant Ombudsmen.

“I have to do some structural re-engineering of the Ombudsman because I see that it's top-
heavy. But that's just me, I have got to consult my friends in government. So if it's really top-
heavy then you have to do some re-engineering,” Martires said.

Martires promised employees and officials that no one will be fired or demoted.

“They will just probably be transferred with the same salary, siguro different position. Kung
medyo mataas position mo then lagay kita sa mas kailangan ka. Walang maaalis kasi kulang
pa nga eh,” said Martires.

(They will just probably be transferred with the same salary, maybe to a different position. If
you have a top position, I will put you somewhere where you're more needed. No one will be
fired, in fact we need more.)

The major reforms also include limiting media access to Ombudsman cases.

Martires also vowed not to engage in political persecution.

“Karamihan nga sa mga kawani na nadadamay sa isang mayor, ang tanging dignidad niyan
'yung kanyang karangalan. So bakit natin sisirain just because they were dragged into the
case? Hindi sa pinagtatakpan 'yung kasalanan but let’s try to protect them,” he said.

Page 5 of 8
(Many government workers are just dragged to the scandal of a mayor, and their sole dignity
comes from their honor. So why will we ruin their honor if they are just dragged into the case?
It's not that we are trying to cover up their mistakes, but let's try to protect them.)
– Rappler.com

https://www.rappler.com/nation/208964-ombudsman-martires-order-on-cases-after-one-
year-at-fact-finding-level

Page 6 of 8
Martires To Prioritize Speedy Resolution Of Cases As New Ombudsman
By Christopher Lloyd Caliwan July 30, 2018, 4:55 pm

MANILA -- Outgoing Supreme Court Associate Justice Samuel Martires on Monday said he
will prioritize looking into the cause of delays in the resolution of pending cases, as he takes
over as the new Ombudsman.

“My priorities will be the pending cases, the issue on inordinate delay which has been an issue
that has been haunting the Sandiganbayan as well as the Supreme Court. I will immediately
look into that and the causes for the delay,” Martires told reporters after attending his last flag-
raising ceremony as a magistrate of the High Court.

Martires said he has tasked Ombudsman Special Prosecutor Edilberto Sandoval to look into
pending cases, which already exceeded the prescribed resolution period.

He added that he would meet with Ombudsman officials to discuss the system that he would
implement, which aims to eliminate inordinate delay in the resolution of cases.

The country's new anti-graft buster also vowed to look into corrupt activities revealed by former
Ombudsman official, lawyer Edna Batacan.

Batacan, who also vied for the Ombudsman post, revealed that there is a “parking fee” for
complaints filed at the office.

This refers to the amount to be paid to Ombudsman investigators to delay the result of
investigation.

“And as what I have told you I will be demanding, not requesting, from Atty. Edna Batacan for
her to identify the officer or employee that she gave money (to)” the 69-year-old Martires said.

Asked about possible charges against Batacan, Martires said: “I don’t want to go into that at
the moment. I just want her to cooperate with us.”

Martires said he has relayed the matter to Sandoval and Overall Deputy Ombudsman Arthur
Carandang.

The issue about Batacan came out after lawyer Ferdinand Topacio asked the Judicial and Bar
Council (JBC) to remove her from its shortlist of nominees for Ombudsman, accusing her of
charging a client PHP8 million for the dismissal of complaints then pending at the Office of the
Ombudsman.

Topacio, in a letter, said Batacan persuaded her client to pay the said amount, which was
allegedly being requested by certain persons in the Ombudsman.

However, when the supposed effort to fix the case failed, she was not able to return the money,
Topacio said.

Both Topacio and Batacan are known to have had former first gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo
for a client.

Martires replaces former SC Associate Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales, who retired on July
26 after finishing a full seven-year term as Ombudsman.

Page 7 of 8
As per Morales, there are 6,000 pending cases t the Ombudsman as of December last year
as compared to the 19,000 cases, which she inherited when she was appointed as
Ombudsman by former President Benigno Aquino III in 2011.

Being SC justice, Ombudsman is God's gift

Martires said he considers his appointment to the High Court and now as Ombudsman as an
opportunity given by God.

“I was just an ordinary lawyer fortunate to serve the judiciary. I never expected that I will be
appointed as associate justice,” Martires said, as he made his farewell speech during the
Supreme Court’s flag raising ceremony before assuming his new position as Ombudsman.

“Di ko inaasahan na darating ang araw na makakatrabaho ko mga mahistrado na magaling (I

did not expect that the day when I will get to work with brilliant magistrates will come) --
(Presbitero) Velasco, (Estela Perlas) Bernabe, (Mariano) Del Castillo, (Teresita Leonardo) De
Castro. Di ko akalain makakasama ko si (I never expected that I will have the chance to work
with) Justice (Antonio) Carpio,” he added.

“It’s my belief that all these happened because it is God’s will. Otherwise, I would not have
been appointed (as) Ombudsman,” he later told reporters.

Ousted Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno had called out Martires, President Rodrigo
Duterte’s first appointee to the High Court, for allegedly mocking her faith during the oral
arguments of the Supreme Court on the quo warranto petition brought against her.

Martires, who is among the seven justices who voted to oust Sereno via quo warranto
proceedings, flatly denied the allegation as he clarified that he actually wanted to point out that
Sereno’s religiosity had nothing to do with her supposed unstable mental state.

Of all the aspirants to the Ombudsman post, he got the unanimous recommendation from his
colleagues.

“The reason why I got 11 votes is because ayaw na nila sa akin (They also did not want me
to stay here),” Martires said jokingly.

“I leave it up to God, if God decides what is best for me for after all he's the only one who
knows what is best for me. I found it normal for these people who criticize and continue to
criticize me. Criticizing has become a pastime among us, anger has become the role of
Filipinos who have nothing to do or is not doing anything. Our hearts are filled with anger and
resentment, we always love to criticize without even offering some suggestion,” he
noted. (PNA)

http://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1043090

Page 8 of 8