Atty Ronaldo Ledesma v CA, Ombudsman Desierto, Asst Ombudsman Aportadera, Ombudsman Fact

Finding and Intelligence Bureau (FIIB) rep Agapito Rosales (2005, Ynares-Santiago)

- Ledesma Chairman of
o First Division, Board of Special Inquiry
o Bureau of Immigration and Deportation
- Somali letter complaint to Ombudsman, FIIB: investigate anomalies surrounding extension of
temporary resident visas of two foreigners
- FIIB:
o Found seven other cases of irregularities
 grant of extension beyond prescribed pd,
 Used recycled, photocopied app for TRV extension [no new siggies]
o Filed formal complaint v Ledesma at Administrative Adjudication Bureau, Ombudsman
 Crim and administrative (administrative charge only for Caronongan, Ang)
 3019; dishonesty, grave misconduct, falsification of public documents,
gross neglect of duty
- Graft Investigation Officer Reyes: joint resolution (recommended the ff)
o Ang and Caronongan administrative cases dismissed
o Ledesma suspended
- Ombudsman approved
- Ombudsman approved resolution dismissing criminal charges v Ledesma (insufficient evidence)
o MR denied
- CA: affirmed Ombudsman joint resolution; reduced suspension
- SC:
o Ledesma: Ombudsman finding advisory on Bureau of Immigration; finding Ledesma
administratively liable encroaches on Bureau powers; good faith; BOC ratified actions
o Ledesma cannot feign ignorance, good faith; was relied upon by Board of Commission
 ||Arias v SB: subordinates relied upon for practicality and efficiency
o No encroachment on auth of BID on immigration matters
 Acts of Ledesma independent of and without regard to BOC
 Thrust of complaint: did Ledesma commit any misconduct, non, mis,
malfeasance in performance of duties
 Ombudsman recommendations not interfering into powers of BOC
 Ombudsman a unique creation of the Const
 Protector of people
 Mandated to act promptly on complaints foremost among powers: auth
to investigate and prosecute || Sec 13 (1)
 RA 6770: Ombudsman Act. Structural and functional organization
 Sec 19. Admin complaints. The ombudsman shall act on all complaints
relating, but not limited to acts or omissions which
o Are contrary to law or regulation
o Unreasonable, unfair, oppressive, discriminatory
o Inconsistent with general course of agency’s functions
o Proceed from mistake of law or arbitrary ascertainment of facts
 o In the exercise of discretionary powers but for improper
purpose
o Otherwise irregular, immoral, devoid of justification
o Ombudsman decisions, orders binding
 || Const, Sec 13, Art XI: recommend … and ensure compliance therewith
 Not merely advisory (not literal interpretation of ‘recommend’)
 ‘recommend’ must be construed with ‘ensure compliance therewith’
 Tapiador case cited by Ledesma referred to procedural aspect
 || RA 6770, Sec 15 (3) …refusal to comply with order (to susp [as in this case],
dismiss, demote, fine, censure, prosecute) shall be a ground for disciplinary
action against officer [so refusing]
 AND NOT ENCROACHING UPON AUTH OF AGENCY
 Power to investigate and prosecute concurrent/shared with proper
officer
o Recommendations to be coursed through proper officer (here,
head of BID)
 + RA 6770 empowers Ombudsman to ensure effectiveness in carrying
out mandate to protect people—
o power to punish for CONTEMPT;
o disciplinary authority + suspension
 Con Comm:
o Ombudsman not mere prosecutorial arm; champion of citizens
o Ombudsman empowered; not mere persuasive powers which
can disappoint people
o Avoid toothless animal
 Leave the rest to legislative (a reversible disability,
therefore; unlike the eunuch’s)
o Ombudsman must be strong and effective, independent
 Departs from classical Ombudsman in that former has
prosecutorial powers
o DENIED

Edgardo Estarija v Edward RAnada, Ombudsman Desierto (succeeded by Marcelo) and Mindanao Deputy
Ombudsman Valenzuela (2006, Quisumbing)

- Ranada, Davao Pilots Asoc, Davao Tuboat and Allied Services

o Filed complaint for gross misconduct
- V Capt Estarija, Harbor Master, Ph Ports Auth, Davao, Sasa, Davao
o Alleged to have demanded monies from 200-2000 for berthing permit issuance
o Was reported to NBI who caught him with 5000
- Ombudsman: suspend Estarija; 3019 criminal charge filed
o Estarija: entrapment; 5thou paid by Cagata for unknown (to E) business/account;
vengeance on acct of Ranada’s losses due to cancelation of sub-agency with Asia Pacific
o Administrative case decision: dishonesty and grave misconduct. Dismissed
 o MR denied
- CA: Estarija: 6770 unconstitutional
o Affirmed
 Constitutionality raised late; failed to overcome presumption
 Affidavits too general; cannot be given weight
o MR denied
- SC:
o Estarija: 6770 unconstitutional—no direct and immediate power, auth, juris to remove,
suspend, demote, fine, censure gov’t officials || Constitution
 || Tapiador
 Insufficient evidence; penalty too harsh
o Factual findings OK
 Estarija does not have a hand in approval of berthing permits
 But decides on berthing space and is consulted on technical matters
 Received money knowing no pending transaction bet them
 Guilty of misconduct: transgression of established, definite rule of action
 Guilty of dishonesty: disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, defraud, etc
 Was dishonest about accepting money
o Question of constitutionality raised at earliest opportune time—Ombudsman had no
juris to entertain question on constitutionality of law; CA proper venue
o RA 6770 constitutional
 Estarija: Ombudsman powers limited to Const—no power to directly remove,
susp, demote, fin, censure gov’t official; power merely recommendatory ||
Tapiador; 15, 21, 22, 25 exceed constitutional powers
 || Ledesma: RA 6770 consistent with intent of framers of Const
 Tapiador obiter dictum; not doctrinal declaration
 Con Comm: powers of Ombudsman enumerated in Sec 12 not exclusive. –
Colayco
 Legislature may enact law to spell out powers of Ombudsman
 Hence, RA 6770
o + powers not recommendatory only—Ombudsman given teeth to render constitutional
body not merely functional but also effective
o DENIED. CA affirmed.

Office of the Ombudsman v Florita Masing, Tayactac

Ombudsman v Masing
Cansino, Mojica, Mojica, Mamparo v Masing, Tayactac (2008, Puno)

- Masing
o Principal of Davao City Integrated Special School
- Tayactac
o Office clerk
- M & T administratively charged for
o collecting unauthorized fees,
o failing to remit authorized fees and
 o to account for public funds
- complainants: parents of students
- Ombudsman: Masing guilty of gross misconduct, neglect of duty—dismissed; Tayactac: simple
neglect of duty, suspended
o (Masing, Tayactac: motion to dismiss; Ombudsman without jurisdiction. DECS has || RA
4670, Magna Carta for Public School Teachers; denied)
o MR denied
- CA: reversed and set aside. Reinstate M and T
- Other administrative cases v Masing: suspension
- CA: also set aside and reversed
- SC:
o Ombudsman may intervene. Rather than remand, SC to decide on issues
o Ombudsman may act on complaints filed against public officers and ees
 || Art XI, Sec 12, Const: …shall act promptly on complaints filed in any form or
manner against public officials or ees of the Gov’t or any subdivision, agency or
instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled
corporations…
 Sec 13: powers
 || RA 6770: other powers, functions, duties (Const list not exclusive
 THEREFORE CLEAR: intent of lawmakers to bestow on Ombudsman full
administrative disciplinary authority in accord with constitutional deliberation
o Findings not mere recommendations
 Binding || Ledesma v CA
 Actually mandatory || Ombudsman v Laja, Ombudsman v CA
o Ombudsman has jurisdiction
 FAbella case cited not applicable
 Involved civil service law infractions; here: Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards for Public Officials and Ees (RA 6713) violated
 Ombudsman the principal and primary complaints and action center against
erring public officers and ees
 || Sec 13, Art XI, Const; RA 6770, Sec 19
 RA 4670 does not confer exclusive disciplinary authority on DECS over public
school teachers, nor exclusive procedure in admin investigations
 4670: 1966 v 6770: 1989
o 1987 Const cannot be restricted by earlier law
 FAbella decision that says Sec 9 of 4670 reflects the legislative intent to impose
a standard and a separate set of procduere in connection with administrative
proceedings involving public school teachers
 To be construed as referring only to specific procedure to be followed in
admin investigations conducted by DECS
o GRANTED. Ombudsman decisions reinstated.
Filipina Samson v Julia Restrivera (2011, Villarama)

Compania General de Tabacos de Filipinas v Board of Public Utility Commissioners (Moreland, 1916)
US, piff-ee v Ang Tang Ho, def-ant (1922, Johns)