FOR three of 12 Vicente Sotto Memorial Medical Center (VSMMC) employees, the Office of the Ombudsman’s takeover of the Genaro “Jan-jan” Jorolan administrative case may actually bring relief.
“The procedure (at the anti-graft office) is clearer,” explained lawyer Joselito Alo, counsel for nurse Carminia Sapio, in an interview yesterday.
For the nine others, the health department’s decision to turn the case over means they all have counter-affidavits to prepare and, if the anti-graft investigator assigned to the case finds it necessary, preventive suspension orders to face.
The nine people were impleaded in the Final Evaluation Report (FER) that the anti-graft office issued after a fact-finding investigation, but were excluded from the administrative complaint that VSMMC chief Dr. Gerardo Aquino lodged.
The Department of Health (DOH) 7 immediately took cognizance of Aquino’s complaint.
It was also quick to issue a preventive suspension order against Sapio, Dr. Philipps Leo Arias and Dr. Joseph Montecillo, a move that meant it was invoking jurisdiction.
Setback
The act set the anti-graft office’s formal investigation back about two weeks, until Health Undersecretary Alexander Padilla said he wanted the anti-graft office to handle the investigation.
The ombudsman’s FER included Arias, Montecillo and Sapio, as well as Marlowe Parreno, the consultant of the Department of Surgery; Angelo Linawagan, the assistant surgeon; and Joseph Alfred de Leon, the one assigned in documenting the procedure.
Also included are Drs. Joanne Mae Merilles, the resident anesthesiologist; Serapio Salazar, the consultant of the Department of Anesthesiology; and Max Joseph Montecillo of the Department of Surgery.
The nurses, in turn, are Isabelita Remulta, the operating room nurse supervisor; circulating nurse Carmenia Sapio; operating room nurse supervisor Consuelo Tecling; the nurse on call, Ida Sumayang; and nursing attendant Rosemarie Villareal.
Two clinical instructors, a certain A. Oplado and one Ramon Penley Pandaan, are impleaded in a parallel criminal case but are excluded from the formal administrative investigation.
Alo pointed out how Sapio and her two co-respondents were summarily suspended and left hanging when the anti-graft office took over.
Still suspended
He added that the DOH, until now, refuses to lift the suspension order, as if the two investigations are merged.
He maintained that the anti-graft office’s takeover does not mean a merger, stressing that the two administrative cases involve different parties and cited different violations.
“The one before the ombudsman involves the Code of Conduct while the one they have involves violations of hospital rules,” Alo said.
Alo is bringing the matter up to the Civil Service Commission (CSC) and is demanding that Sapio be given pay for the two weeks that she was prevented from reporting to work.
Alo said he is aware of the possibility that the Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas can also impose preventive suspension on his client, as well as the 11 others now impleaded.
Condition
However, he said, they are at least protected by the anti-graft office’s own rules, which provide that preventive suspension can only be imposed if the evidence of guilt is strong.
“We will just wait for notices or summons from the Office of the Ombudsman,” he said.
When asked how he is preparing for the anti-graft case, Alo said they will simply adopt the defense they have already put up before the DOH.
Lawyer Merlo Bagano, counsel for Arias, said they will also be doing the same. He explained that they have already submitted their answer to the DOH and it covered the same material allegations in the administrative case before the ombudsman.
In her answer to the DOH, Sapio said her involvement in the procedure was limited to preparing the packs and instruments, draper, sutures, cautery cord, suction tubing and operating sponges for use on the operating table.
She said she left the operating room to prepare another table and set of packs and instruments when Arias, Linawagan and Dr. Jason Sia decided on a double set-up, in case their planned non-invasive approach would fail.
While she was about to leave to get the needed items, she said she asked people who were not members of the medical team to go out. Six people went out.
She said she proceeded to prepare the other table when she returned with the materials and was there when she “suddenly heard the spontaneous outburst of laughter.”
She said she turned and saw “everybody was in jubilation,” adding that she then realized that the procedure had been a success.
“Toward the end of the procedure, respondent went out of the emergency (operating room) to prepare (for) the transfer of the patient to the recovery room,” she said. (KNR)
