Slowly, the Ombudsman

The news report last May 15 only shows that the Ombudsman of the Visayas is slowly acting on complaints that, we note with emphasis, was filed, not by any private individual, but by a government agency against one of its own officials.

The case for plunder against Monico Puentevella was filed by the Philippine Sports Commission through its chairman, Ambassador Harry Angpin on Sept. 14, 2009. That is almost five years ago, and yet the Ombudsman is still investigating.

If there is any change, a bit of progress from the original complaint, it is that the docket of the case shows it is not only Monico Puentevella but others are included in the charge. I wonder whether the Ombudsman is investigating a conspiracy, in which case then we can give a little leeway.

Nevertheless, I still think the Ombudsman is moving ever so slowly and that gives rise to the suspicion that something is not right. Justice delayed is justice denied, and even if the aggrieved party is the government, still it is unjust that P50.5 million of government funds has not been fully accounted for. This has deprived the people, the sports program, specifically, of funds for its operation.

We can be wrong that the Ombudsman of the Visayas is taking his sweet time but, after over four years of investigation, the snail’s pace of its investigation is intolerable.

It has been observed that the biggest and strongest ally of grafters and the corrupt and abusive is the slow action of government to enforce the law. This includes our courts.

The reason that the concept of the Ombudsman was adopted in our Constitution and was clothed with powers and immunities was because our judicial system was slow. It was reasoned that with the Ombudsman focusing on graft and corruption, justice would be more independent, quicker, fiercer and more honest.

But, as public sentiment now shows, the Ombudsman has lost its luster and its image as the bulwark against graft and corruption.

Some cases in the Ombudsman have been lingering there for years. I can recall a case filed there that remains unresolved for close to 20 years.

Several times the Ombudsman for the Visayas, Pelagio Apostol came to Bacolod calling on the people to help the Ombudsman ferret out the grafters and the corrupt, but with this kind of performance, does this encourage or inspire?

I believe this slowpoke performance is a disincentive. It is merely asking the civic-minded citizen to jump into a sea of disappointment.

Thus, if Apostol wants people to help by informing and providing documents to the Ombudsman, he must show us that our effort is not wasted.

I remember telling the then Ombudsman Aniano Desierto that if he wanted our help, he must assure us that, our efforts are not in vain. But he and the others that followed him, like Apostol, have been a letdown.

The longer the cases are resolved, the bolder the corrupt are. They can be led to believe the law will take too long to reach them that after a while, people will lose interest or even forget. They can even work by then under the table to get their cases dismissed surreptitiously.

For instance, the computer scam against Puentevella and three others took too many years that by the time the case was filed by the Ombudsman with the Sandiganbayan, one of the accused had already passed away without his name cleared, or his guilt determined.

The fertilizer case against Puentevella also still lingers in limbo in the cabinet of the Ombudsman.

No wonder people believe that the cases in connection with the PDAP scams will soon recede into the background once the nation enters the election season. The people place their trust in the Department of Justice and the Ombudsman, but can we bet on their complying with the doctrine of speedy justice? The Ombudsman’s record speaks for itself. If there is cynicism spreading in the land, the blame can be traced to its doorstep, among other judicial bodies.
The plunder case against Puentevella was based on the report of the Commission on Audit so that the solid facts are there for the Ombudsman to work on. Puentevella had been given all the leeway and opportunity to present his side.

In his letter to Sammy Montoyo, Apostol says the case against Puentevella is still alive and subject to ongoing investigation. That is really a bureaucratic response after over four years of investigation. People can only wait at the Ombudsman’s pleasure.*

back to top