Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
September 4, 20121
I. STATEMENT OF FACTS
_________________________
1 http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/
1
september2012/196231.pdf
2
the conclusion of these public hearings, the Committee on Justice
passed and adopted Committee Resolution No. 3, recommending to the
President the dismissal of petitioner Barreras-Sulit from the service and
the filing of appropriate charges against her Deputies and Assistants
before the appropriate government office for having committed acts
and/or omissions tantamount to culpable violations of the Constitution
and betrayal of public trust, which are violations under the Anti-Graft
and Corrupt Practices Act and grounds for removal from office under
the Ombudsman Act. Hence the petition.
III. ISSUES
3
IV. RULINGS
4
The Power of the President toRemove a Deputy Ombudsman
and a Special Prosecutor isImplied from his Power toAppoint. In
giving the President the power to remove a Deputy Ombudsman and
Special Prosecutor, Congress simply laid down in express terms an
authority that is already implied from the President's constitutional
authority to appoint the aforesaid officials in the Office of the
Ombudsman. The integrity and effectiveness of the Deputy
Ombudsman for the MOLEO as a military watchdog looking into
abuses and irregularities that affect the general morale and
professionalism in the military is certainly of primordial importance in
relation to the President's own role as Commander-in-Chief of the
Armed Forces. It would not be incongruous for Congress, therefore, to
grant the President concurrent disciplinary authority over the Deputy
Ombudsman for the military and other law enforcement offices.
5
no evidence at all of any bribery that took place, or of any corrupt
intention or questionable motivation. The OP's pronouncement of
administrative accountability against petitioner and the imposition upon
him of the corresponding penalty of dismissal must be reversed and set
aside, as the findings of neglect of duty or misconduct in office do not
amount to a betrayal of public trust. Hence, the President, while he may
be vested with authority, cannot order the removal of petitioner as
Deputy Ombudsman, there being no intentional wrongdoing of the
grave and serious kind amounting to a betrayal of public trust.
____________________________
2 sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/september2012/196231
6
VII. SEPARATE OPINIONS
___________________________
3 sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/september2012/196231
7
4 http://nlpdl.nlp.gov.ph:81/SC01/2014jan/196231_bernabe.pdf
8
__________________________
5
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jan2014/gr_196231_so_2014
.
html#leonen
as far as the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman is concerned.
Petitioner Gonzales must still be held accountable for his actions. His
actions as described in the report and in the decision of the Office of
the President are troubling. There is need to continue the investigation
so that the public may finally find closure concerning these incidents.
VIII. PUBLICATIONS
9
office of the special prosecutor, an advisory from the SC public
information office read.
___________________________
6
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jan2014/gr_196231_so_2014
.html#leonen
No explanation was immediately provided.
The court, she said, has yet to act on a pending motion for
clarification filed by the Office of the Solicitor General. Gonzales is
set to retire next month.
10
At present, Gonzalesposition is being held by director Rudiger
Falcis II in an officer-in-charge capacity. Gonzales has been trying to
reclaim his post since October 2012 or a month after the SC ruled in
his favor. With Michael Punongbayan
11