JUSTICE Secretary Vitaliano N. Aguirre II has questioned the Ombudsman’s decision to absolve former President Benigno S. Aquino III in the Mamasapano clash that resulted in the killing of 44 police commandos in January 2015.
The culpability of Aquino in the Mamasapano massacre was raised anew, as the administration of President Duterte is set to conduct an independent reinvestigation on Oplan Exodus that led to the killing of the Special Action Force (SAF) men by gunmen belonging to the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters and private armed groups.
“The BOI [Board of Inquiry], as well as the Senate, has found his [Aquino’s] liability. That’s why I really wonder why he was not charged [by the Ombudsman] now that he doesn’t have immunity [from criminal suits] anymore,” Aguirre said in an interview.
“Why was the official who gave the order absolved when those who just followed it are the ones charges in court now?” he stressed.
Aguirre recalled that the Senate inquiry led by Sen. Grace Poe has established that Aquino was “ultimately responsible” for the Mamasapano mission, as he himself authorized the operation that targetted Malaysian terrorist Zulkifli bin Hir, alias Marwan.
The Senate report in March 2015 only did not contain any specific recommendation to file charges against Aquino because he was still immune from suit at that time.
But after the end of Aquino’s term in July last year, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales has not filed any charge against the former president.
Morales is an appointee of Aquino, who pressured Morales’s predecessor, Merceditas N. Gutierrez, to resign under pain of impeachment.
In the second anniversary of the encounter last week, Morales’s office filed cases only against former National Police chief Alan Purisima and former SAF commander Getulio P. Napeñas Jr. for graft and usurpation of public functions.
The anticrime watchdog Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC) has already pushed for the impeachment of Morales for her supposed failure to investigate and prosecute those found liable for the death of the SAF 44.
The group criticized Morales for her alleged inaction on the multiple homicide charges filed by families of some of the policemen who were killed in the incident.
VACC said the Ombudsman should be impeached for criminal negligence, betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution.
Aguirre has insisted that Aquino’s liability in the Mamasapano clash had already been established in previous investigations.
The DOJ chief, a relative of Napeñas who served as his lawyer in previous inquiries, specifically cited the text message exchanges between Aquino and Purisima a night before the actual operation.
“That is what he always says, but he is lying…. He claimed he wasn’t talking to someone on the phone about it because its battery was dead for two hours. But that’s impossible. It was a very important operation and you can’t expect him to let his phone off for that long,” Aguirre argued.
Thus, the DOJ challenged the former president to submit his mobile phone for examination of the independent commission to be created for the reinvestigation.
“He should let his cellphone examined so we will know what he really told the generals – if there was a stand down order or none,” he stressed.
“There are many questions that remained unanswered, that’s why this reinvestigation will be very helpful in getting the closure and justice that the families of the SAF 44 are waiting for,” he explained.
Kasi ang pota ay napakacorrupt!
I am against corruption that’s why I am against corrupt ombytchwoman cunntcheater capro moralLess!
Carpio-Morales is a corrupt ombudsman, neglecting her job in order to advance the interest of the Liberal Party of the Philippines. Erineo “Ayong,” Maliksi, a Liberal Party member’s graft and corruption case was dismissed by the court due to “inordinate delays” by Carpio-Morales even though the court found “reasonable ground to believe that an offense has been committed.”. “’Suffice it to state that based on obtaining facts, there is reasonable ground to believe that an offense has been committed. Be that as it may, however, it behooves the Court to state that the other ground of inordinate delay … is an overriding consideration…’ the court said in its resolution”. “The court also noted that the Ombudsman only released the joint resolution finding probable cause July 8, 2014, four years after the consolidation of the three cases. The resolution did not even include the third PCSO complaint, the court said. ” newsinfo**Inquirer**Net/673013/govt-seeks-reinstatement-of-case-vs-maliksi
And another one: www***mb***com***ph/sandiganbayan-dismisses-graft-charges-vs-bohol-solon-governor/ “Since it took 15 years for Office of the Ombudsman to file charges, the Sandiganbayan First Division has dismissed due to inordinate delay the graft case against Bohol Rep. Rene Relampagos, Gov. Edgardo Chatto and their co-accused in connection with the undervalued sale of the province’s water and electric utilities.
newsinfo***inquirer***net/758240/court-junks-p627-m-graft-case-vs-gov-after-long-delay “Court junks P627-M graft case vs gov after long delay”
2. Why do you praise ombytchwoman Cunntcheater corruptbytch when she hasn’t won a single big case against the corrupt like GMA, in fact only not guilty verdicts are out?
3. I filed a case against the FDA with overwhelming evidence and I lost!WTF!!!!
Ang alam ko number 1 corrupt si ombytchwoman as she was entrusted with the power to counter corruption yet she condones corruption!
The FDA is extremely corrupt. List of people at the FDA and DOH who are corrupt: Atty Romela Devera, Sec. Garin, Dr. Miriam Sales, Atty. Lutero III, Jesusa Cirunay, Dr. Peter Glenn Chua, Agnette Peralta, MArivic Paulino, Atty. Jasper Lascano and Atty. Emilio Polig and former employees: Sec. Ona, FDA chief Suzette Lazo, FDA chief Kenneth Hartigan-Go (and now undersecretary of Health)! are extremely corrupt!
Wicked_Lia(r) said, ” mukhang kilala mo ang mga tao sa FDA aH!
nakakatransaksyones mo ba?
lahat naman ng ahensya may mga BULOK……..”
Yan na! Inamin ng corrupt silang mga N0ytard at MARnanakaw!
Why hasn’t Ombytchwoman Cunntcheater Capro MoralLess Corruptbytch held Purusama in contempt of court by violating the suspension order on him? Corrupt much?
How come Ombytchwoman Cunntcheater Capro MoralLess Corruptbytch hasn’t filed charges against anyone in the North Rail project scandal? Corrupt much? wwwmbcomph/what-happened-to-northrail/
For the information of the bloggers:
Read Atty Salumbides et al vs. Ombudsman, G.R. no. 180917 promulgated by the Supreme Court on April 23, 2010.” This is one of the last decisions written by former Justice Carpio-Morales now, the Ombudsman herself. While the petitioners prayer for the extension of the “doctrine of condonation” was rejected because it can only be available to elective officials, Carpio-Morales asserted the doctrine of condonation and cited several cases to wit:
“More than 60 years ago, the Court in Pascual v. Hon. Provincial Board of Nueva Ecija17c?a issued the landmark ruling that prohibits the disciplining of an elective official for a wrongful act committed during his immediately preceding term of office. The Court explained that “[t]he underlying theory is that each term is separate from other terms, and that the reelection to office operates as a condonation of the officer’s previous misconduct to the extent of cutting off the right to remove him therefor.”18c?a
The Court should never remove a public officer for acts done prior to his present term of office. To do otherwise would be to deprive the people of their right to elect their officers. When the people elect[e]d a man to office, it must be assumed that they did this with knowledge of his life and character, and that they disregarded or forgave his faults or misconduct, if he had been guilty of any. It is not for the court, by reason of such faults or misconduct[,] to practically overrule the will of the people.19c?a
Lizares v. Hechanova, et al.20c?a replicated the doctrine. The Court dismissed the petition in that case for being moot, the therein petitioner “having been duly reelected, is no longer amenable to administrative sanctions.”21c?a
Ingco v. Sanchez, et al.22c?a clarified that the condonation doctrine does not apply to a criminal case.23c?a Luciano v. The Provincial Governor, et al.,24c?a Olivarez v. Judge Villaluz,25c?a and Aguinaldo v. Santos26echoed the qualified rule that reelection of a public official does not bar prosecution for crimes committed by him prior thereto.
Consistently, the Court has reiterated the doctrine in a string of recent jurisprudence including two cases involving a Senator and a Member of the House of Representatives.27c?a
Salalima v. Guingona, Jr.28c?a and Mayor Garcia v. Hon. Mojica29reinforced the doctrine. The condonation rule was applied even if the administrative complaint was not filed before the reelection of the public official, and even if the alleged misconduct occurred four days before the elections, respectively. Salalima did not distinguish as to the date of filing of the administrative complaint, as long as the alleged misconduct was committed during the prior term, the precise timing or period of which Garcia did not further distinguish, as long as the wrongdoing that gave rise to the public
official’s culpability was committed prior to the date of reelection.” (end of quote)
Did Morales forgot her recent decision before she left the Supreme Court? Why did she reasserted the “doctrine of condonation” as to elective officials when she was still a member of the Supreme Court yet now, conveniently urged the Supreme Court to revisit the time honored doctrine (60 years)? For convenience?
Are you saying that the Supreme Court was consistently wrong in a string of several cases for 60 years reiterating the said doctrine and you are the only one correct Sereno? Are you saying that Capio-Morales was also wrong considering that the decision penned by Carpio-Morales was decided by a “court en banc”?
“As for San Pedro, his administrative liability was rendered moot and academic owing to his reelection in the same position in 2010,” she said, referring to a Supreme Court doctrine that condones the administrative liability of an elected public official for a past offense once that official is reelected for a fresh term.
Kaya pala! (No wonder!)
Proof that N0ytard is condoning corruption:
Kaya pala inignore yung complaint ko against the FDA, DOH, etc. He is condoning the corrupt practices of government employees! Doesn’t N0ytard know that those government employees are extorting money from the public? If we do not give, they won’t give us a permit, just like what happened to me! And I reported it to ombitchwoman and she dismissed the case.
Once more N0ytard blames the victims:
Blaming the victims once more and I thought he was anti-corruption? Isn’t one incident, one too many?
Even MARnanakaw admits that there’s massive corruption: philstar***com/police-metro/2015/11/27/1526400/mar-inamin-na-bigo-ang-daang-matuwid
www***philstar***com/headlines/2015/12/10/1531041/noy-fight-vs-corruption-it-takes-two-tango Uh0oh! Fault of the victims again.
“Abaya should be held liable as he signed the supposedly anomalous contract.” newsinfo***inquirer***net/745198/poe-disappointed-as-ombudsman-spares-abaya-in-graft-charges
P3.8-B MRT deal awarded without public bidding done by pAbaya!!! N0ytard approved.
Napoles insists Abad ‘tutored’ her on fund scam, says she gave to campaigns of Chiz, Alan, Villar interaksyoncom/article/87674/napoles-insists-abad-tutored-her-on-fund-scam-says-she-gave-to-campaigns-of-chiz-alan-villar
Philippine Politics has been listed as second most profitable business in Asia, beating giant companies like Toyota Motors, Samsung, Keppel, and even its own San Miguel and Ayala Corporation according to a study published by Money Magazine in 2014. kahimyang***info/kauswagan/general-blogs/1743/study-says-philippine-politics-is-one-of-the-most-profitable-businesses-in-asia