Checks and balance

Bencyrus Ellorin

POLITICS is power.

Government is the repository of the enormous powers of the state.

The beauty of democracy is the equitable distribution of these powers of the state.

Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution defines our democratic and republican system. “…Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.”

The Bill of Rights or Article 3 of the Constitution protects the people from possible excesses in the exercise of state power. Separation of the three co-equal branches of government — executive, legislature and the judiciary — prevents concentration of powers on any of the its branches.

The Office of the Ombudsman has been created to fight graft and corruption in government. It has been tasked to investigate and prosecute government officials accused of crimes, specifically graft and corruption. The President appoints the Ombudsman from a list of nominees. The Ombudsman serves a fixed term of seven years and can only be removed through impeachment.

Two heads of the Office of the Ombudsman had faced impeachment — Aniano Desierto and Merceditas Gutierrez. Then a congressman of the 1st District of Misamis Oriental, Oscar Moreno endorsed the impeachment complaint filed by lawyer Ernesto Francisco Jr. in 2001. The House of Representatives however did not impeach Desierto.

Gutierrez was impeached by the House of Representatives on March 22, 2011. She however skirted bitter impeachment trial at the Senate by resigning.

I have taken up these recent historical facts of the Ombudsman to show that even if it has been bestowed vast powers by law, it is not infallible.

Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales is one of the most trustworthy officials of government today. Her anti-graft and corruption drive can be characterized as relentless. Generally, it is good for the country. Weeding out government of misfits strengthens our government. Any mistake in this crusade, however, weakens our system as it affects efficient delivery of public service. Any mistake would constitute injustice.

This is why, I think, the Supreme Court in its landmark decision in November 2015, the Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional Section 14 of Republic Act 6770 or the Ombudsman Act of 1989. This section prevents courts from issuing writ of injunction on actions by the Ombudsman. The high court basically clipped some of the powers of the Ombudsman.

One of the earliest beneficiaries of the decision was Mayor Moreno in the Ajinomoto case. It can be recalled that the Court of Appeals stopped the dismissal order of Mayor Moreno and then acting treasurer Glenn Banez in 2015. The appellate court eventually reversed the Ombudsman decision citing, among others, violation of the mayor’s right to due process and failure to present substantial evidence. The CA, in overturning the Ombudsman’s decision in the Ajinomoto case, was frank and minced no words in citing infirmities in the Ajinomoto ruling.

It may go down in history as a mystery why Mayor Moreno may be the most favorite punching bag of the Ombudsman. He is facing at least 24 cases in the Ombudsman, with contents and arguments copy-pasted from erroneous plunder case filed by an Emano stooge. Failing to pursue the plunder, the Padayon camp chopped the case into 24 pieces. Now, one has resulted in a similar penalty as the Ajinomoto case. Five more similar decisions may come out soon. And many more. I hope not.

This is political war of attrition. Who melts first, loses. But that is politics. The Ombudsman does not deal with political question. Which is why, I ask, if even for just a minute, did the Ombudsman ask whether it has been used as platform for political vendetta in these cases against Mayor Moreno? Didn’t it find unnatural that the person it wanted dismissed, is dismissing, would be dismissing has led a performing local government. That it has even awarded it with the Blue Certification Award in December 2015 for “having complied with the standards set by the Ombudsman in addressing bureaucratic red tape issues”?

Did the Ombudsman pause to ask why Moreno won against the instigators of the cases against him, not once, but twice — and in landslide fashion?

You cannot blame Labor Secretary Bebot Bello for sniping at the Ombudsman when he said, “Ayaw yata ng Ombudsman ng mabait at masipag.”

But, then again, I would still think the Ombudsman is doing its job well. Repeated miscarriage of justice, however would eventually redound to the erosion of the nobility of their crusade.

The law may be harsh, but it is the law, a legal maxim says. But even in its harshness, the law which has been made to protect the interest of the people, the source of all state power and government authority has to be forthright and compassionate.

This is the beauty of our democratic and republican system. An organ of government can err, but another organ can rectify in the name of justice, freedom and our dear democracy.

There should be no doubt, the Court would render a sound decision in this present case of Mayor Moreno and many more to come.

And the Ombudsman? They are most welcome in Cagayan de Oro to see for themselves why Mayor Moreno is on a winning streak and most of all, loved.

Nobody loves misfits. Right?