THE Office of the Ombudsman, in a 28-page ruling dated Sept. 1, 2025, has found former Cebu City mayor Michael Rama and former assessor Maria Theresa Rosell guilty of oppression and grave abuse of authority.
The decision concluded that the two former officials acted “with cruelty, severity and excessive use of authority” in their 2023 dealings with four regular employees from the City Assessor’s Office (CAO). This ruling is the culmination of a complaint filed by the employees in February 2024, adding another administrative sanction to the former mayor’s record.
WHAT PROMPTED THE RULING. This case was initiated by a complaint filed on Feb. 23, 2024, by four CAO employees: Filomena Atuel, Maria Almicar Diongzon, Sybil Ann Ybañez and Chito Dela Cerna. They accused Rama and Rosell of a string of offenses, including grave misconduct, oppression, grave abuse of authority and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.
At the heart of their complaint was the claim that the four, all serving as tax mappers, were suddenly reassigned “without valid grounds.” More than just a simple transfer, they were summarily removed from the payroll and left in a professional limbo, stripped of their regular functions and given no clear duties.
A PATTERN OF INVALID ACTIONS. The Ombudsman’s findings were reinforced by an earlier, separate ruling from the Civil Service Commission in Central Visayas (CSC 7). The CSC 7 had already investigated the matter and declared the employees’ reassignment “invalid and without legal effect.”
According to the CSC 7, the move failed to meet the legal standard of “exigency of public service” and, more critically, “deprived the employees of their right to work and receive compensation.” The Ombudsman’s decision cited this, along with the payroll removal and reports of surveillance, as “indicia of an invalid reassignment, a far cry from being regular.”
EVIDENCE: A ‘HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS’ MEMO. A key piece of evidence cited in the Ombudsman’s decision was a specific document that revealed the officials’ intent. The ruling highlighted a memorandum issued by Rosell on Oct. 18, 2023. This memo explicitly prohibited the four reassigned employees from following up on any transactions at CAO.
The Ombudsman found the timing and content of this memo to be “highly suspicious.” It was pointed out that Rosell issued the directive after the complainants had already begun to fight back by filing multiple grievances with the CSC, the Department of the Interior and Local Government, Anti-Red Tape Authority and the Ombudsman itself. The ruling described the memo, which “specifically targeted complainants,” as an overt act that “constitute[s] oppression” and was “unfair, unreasonable, and issued in bad faith.”
REJECTED DEFENSE. During the investigation, Rama contended that the controversial transfers were simply a valid “exercise of management prerogative.”
The Ombudsman flatly rejected this explanation, labeling it “self-serving and off-tangent.” The decision underscored a key point of civil service law: rules on reassignment exist “precisely to determine whether an order... addresses a legitimate exigency in public service or one attended with malice and irregularity.” In this instance, the Ombudsman found clear evidence of malice and irregularity.
PENALTY: WHY A FINE, NOT SUSPENSION. For these acts, the Ombudsman found Rama and Rosell guilty on four counts of oppression or grave abuse of authority — one for each complainant. The penalty imposed was the maximum of a one-year suspension from public service.
However, neither official will actually serve this suspension. The ruling explicitly states that since both are “no longer in government service,” the penalty is automatically converted. Rama lost the May 2025 mayoral race to then-councilor Nestor Archival Sr., and Rosell is likewise no longer at her post.
The one-year suspension becomes a fine equivalent to six months’ salary for each of them, payable to the Ombudsman. This fine can be deducted from any of their accrued benefits or leave credits.
WHAT’S NEXT: OTHERS CLEARED. While the two former heads were found guilty, the Ombudsman cleared several other co-respondents named in the complaint. Rosell’s husband, former city administrator Collin Rosell, along with Francis May Jacaban, Angelique Cabugao, Jay-Ar Pescante, Lester Joey Beniga and Nelyn Sanrojo, were all cleared due to a “lack of substantial evidence.”
This ruling is not an isolated incident for the former mayor. It follows a series of administrative cases. In May 2024, Rama was ordered to serve a six-month preventive suspension while this very reassignment case was being investigated. Separately, in October 2024, he was dismissed from service in a different case concerning grave misconduct and abuse of authority, a decision the Ombudsman upheld in early 2025.
When approached by the media for comment on this latest guilty verdict, Rama said that all legal matters are being handled by his lawyer. / CAV