|
Monday, April 03, 2006
SC to cite Ombudsman in contempt for defying order
MANILA -- The Supreme Court (SC) has warned the Office of the Ombudsman of contempt charges if it continues to refuse to submit a report of its probe on the criminal liability of public officials and private individuals involved in the anomalous P1.3 billion automated election deal entered into by the Commission on Elections (Comelec).
The SC ordered Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez to submit her first report on or before June 30 and to regularly submit a progress report of her investigation every three months thereafter until the matter is finally resolved.
It dismissed Gutierrez's comment filed last March 2, contending that being a constitutionally independent body, her office has no duty to render reports on the status, eventual outcome, and completion of its investigation on the election automation contract of the Comelec with Mega Pacific Consortium.
"We sternly remind the Office of the Ombudsman: this Court will not hesitate to exercise its power of contempt against anyone who fails to observe due respect for its directives, mandates, orders and judgments," the SC said.
"Deference to the Court's simple order should have prompted the Office of the Ombudsman to act on its responsibility to inform us of its actions regarding the case. Thus, we strongly remind it to be more prudent in performing its basic constitutional duty and in following the directives of this Court," it added.
The SC cited Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v. Comelec case where the Comelec chairman and the commissioners were fined the sum of P110,000 after they were found guilty of contempt for "brazen disobedience to the Court's lawful directives, for delaying the ultimate resolution of the case to the prejudice of the litigants and of the country."
Baffled over the apparent hesitation of the Office of the Ombudsman to act on its January 13 order, the High Tribunal explained that the power to punish for contempt "is essential to the preservation of order in judicial proceedings and to the enforcement of judgments, orders and mandates of the courts and to the due administration of justice."
Four months before the May 10, 2004 national elections, the SC voided the Comelec-Mega Pacific automation deal, which would have computerized for the first time the counting of votes, for violating the law and policies on public bidding.
"The hesitation and quibbling of the Office of the Ombudsman over this simple matter surprises this Court, considering that even without this express directive, the former should have taken it upon itself to conduct a moto proprio investigation," the SC said.
The court also clarified that it is not in any way interfering with the Office of the Ombudsman as a "competent investigatory body" by directing it to determine the culpability of those involved in the nullified automation deal.
"In making that statement, this Court recognized the constitutional mandate of the Office of the Ombudsman as protector of the people against erring and abusive public officials," it said.
The SC's original order stemmed from the motion filed by the Information Technology Foundation of the Philippines seeking an order to direct the Office of the Ombudsman to give an update on its investigation.
The foundation noted that since the court declared the Comelec's automation project null and void, the Office of the Ombudsman has not made come up with the determination of criminal liability of any public official and conspiring private individual.
Among those sought to be investigated were Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos Sr. and Commissioners Rufino Javier, Mehol Sadain, Florentino Tuason Jr., and Resurreccion Borra. (ECV/Sunnex)
(April 3, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
|
|
[return to top]
[home]
|
|
So sue us, aide dares bloc vs Charter change