The Trouble with Joc-joc

20 July 2006—Seven months after he fled the country on 11 December 2005, his whereabouts is finally known. The irony is he remains elusive. Former Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-joc” Bolante arrived from Seoul, Korea on 7 July 2006 at the Los Angeles International Airport. US Immigration authorities took him into custody for a cancelled visa. He has been detained for 11 days now. Details of his offense remain unclear.

The U. S. embassy in the Philippines has officially said it cannot comment on matters pertaining to law enforcement. The Department of Foreign Affairs remains mum on Bolante’s case, when it is a matter of their jurisdiction because it involves a Filipino national in a foreign land. The details known to the public is limited to the fact that his B1/B2 business visa was supposedly cancelled.

The Bolante family has requested privacy for the immigration hearings at San Pedro Detention Center in Los Angeles, even declining the presence of a Philippine embassy official. They purportedly did not seek aid from the Philippine consulate in Los Angeles.

Finding Bolante is a public concern. The Senate Agriculture and Blue Ribbon Committees repeatedly summoned him from October to December 2005 but he failed to appear before the investigating panel. He was cited in contempt on 13 December 2005 and issued an arrest order.

The situation is ripe for speculation as days go by. And it does not help that agencies supposed to be concerned have not lifted a finger, such as the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice. Mr. Bolante is a fugitive of local authorities and should be brought to the Philippines. The people deserve to hear his side on the fertilizer fund program which he helped design and implement.

RP to receive US$21M anti-corruption aid from Millenium Challenge Corp.

19 June 2006 – The Philippines stands to receive US$21 million in aid from the Millenium Challenge Corporation, a U.S. government corporation created to help developing countries achieve sustainable economic development and administer funds from the Millenium Challenge Account.

With this grant, the Philippines is expected to bolster efforts in the area of “stamping out corruption, improving tax collection, and channeling resources for poverty reduction.” Partner agencies for this project are the Office of the Ombudsman, the Department of Finance, and the DOF’s subagencies, the Bureau of Customs and Bureau of Internal Revenue.

The reforms are focused on three main project components. The first component is Data Mining and Predictive Auditing Capacity-Building, which aims to develop a Center for Revenue Enhancement to effectively gather and validate tax collection data. Methodology-Building and Capacity-Building will cover the skills enhancement of the implementing groups of the DOF’s Revenue Integrity Protection Service, Run After Tax Evaders, Run After the Smugglers campaigns through extensive training; investments in information technology, surveillance tools and equipment; and the development of a customs tracking system. The third and last component will build Expanded Investigation teams, to bolster the effort to bring more corruption cases to court. Government investigators will also be given improved compensation and will be subject to performance indicators.

The two-year plan targets an increase in the conviction rate in corruption cases to 40% from 30%, a 10% rise in income tax returns filed by professionals and the self-employed, and a rise in the number of favorable tax appeals decisions to 24 cases from 2 cases. Funding will be administered through the U.S. Agency for International Development.

As part of the government’s initiative to curb corruption, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has requested the Department of Budget and Management to release P1 billion as the government’s counterpart fund to the Millenium Challenge Corp.’s grant. The agency tasked to oversee the parallel anti-corruption campaign is the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission. According to PAGC Chairperson Constancia de Guzman, they are drafting guidelines for how the funds will be utilized by recipient agencies.

Gen. Garcia acquitted on perjury case

24 May 2006 -- The Sandiganbayan’s Third Division on 22 May acquitted retired Major Gen. Carlos F. Garcia of perjury. The Ombudsman had charged Garcia with misdeclaring his Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN).

In a decision penned by Associate Justice Norberto Geraldez, the court ruled that “the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Garcia had committed the crime.” The court found no proof that he had knowledge of a false entry in his SALN and that he deliberately asserted the falsehood.

The Ombudsman had alleged that the increases in Garcia’s SALN from 1993-2003 were disproportionate to his legitimate income. Garcia was charged for not declaring in his SALN several vehicles a Toyota Previa, a Mitsubishi L-300, and a Honda Civicwith a total estimated cost of P1.5 million.

The court also lifted the hold-departure order on Garcia and the bail he filed was canceled and returned to him. However, Garcia is still facing plunder charges in connection with P303 million of unexplained wealth allegedly acquired by taking advantage of his position as military comptroller and two cases of forfeiture involving P143 million and P202 million in assets of the general and his family.

SC orders Ombudsman to fast track investigation

3 April 2006—The Supreme Court ordered the Ombudsman to speed up its investigation into the criminal liability of Comelec Commissioners involved in the failed automation project with Mega Pacific eSolutions Inc. In an eight-page resolution, the Ombudsman was directed to produce a report on its probe on officials and private individuals involved in the
P1.3 B case. The high court has given the anti-graft body until June 30 to render its first report.

The resolution was issued in response to the February 24, 2006 reply of the Ombudsman on why the court should not exercise its contempt powers.  The Supreme Court issued a prior resolution on February 14, 2006, asking the Ombudsman for an update since it has provided no information on its investigation since the Court ruled to nullify and void the contract on January 13, 2004.

The Ombudsman came up with the following points in response to the Court's resolution: 

• As a constitutionally independent body, the Ombudsman has no duty to report the status and completion of its investigation into the Comelec case, further justifying the January 13, 2006  “referral” did not specifically order it to come up with a report
• It is for the Ombudsman to determine the criminal liability of the officials involved “nothing more, noting less”, even if the January 13, 2004 decision is interpreted as a “directive”
• The Ombudsman actually acted on the Court’s directive by immediately conducting a series of investigations

This was the answer of the high court to the Ombudsman: 

• The power to cite in contempt is necessary to enforce court decisions, further, there is no excuse for disobeying or disregarding the order of the Court to investigate the Comelec officials involved
• In deference to the high court, the Ombudsman should have issued a report of its actions on the case
• The decision of the Court on January 13, 2004 contained a “directive”, not a “referral”.  Even without an express directive, the Ombudsman should have taken upon itself to conduct an investigation

The high court sent a stern warning to the Ombudsman that it will not hesitate to exercise its power of contempt on anyone failing to act on directives and other orders.  It gave as an example the Comelec which was cited in contempt for disobedience to a Supreme Court directive on the Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Comelec case, and for delaying the resolution of the case. 

The “Comelec Mega Pacific case is both urgent and complicated” according to the Ombudsman. The report will prove as a litmus test for Ombudsman  Merceditas Gutierrez, and how serious she is to exercise the Ombudsman’s constitutional mandate to protect the people from erring and abusive public officials.

Ombudsman seeks support for Anti-Corruption plan

22 March 2006—“Promises must be followed by action,” was the challenge posed at the Anti-Corruption Convergence Summit organized by the Office of the Ombudsman last Friday at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Ortigas. About 80 representatives from the Commission on Audit, Civil Service Commission, Presidential Anti-Graft Commission, the legislature, judiciary, the Executive, civil society and the business sector signed a covenant in support of the National Anti-Corruption plan of action.

For her part, CSC Chair Karina David urged anti-corruption partners to ‘clean their own backyards’ and laid out Civil Service efforts and plans to purge the agency of corruption. She reported that the commission is looking at how examinations are conducted, reviewing the bases for promotion, and instituting ethics tests and other ways to professionalize the bureaucracy. A study is also in the works to improve the compensation package of government employees.

Senate President Franklin Drilon, meanwhile, cited findings from two recently conducted surveys by Transparency International and the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy Group. The first reveals the Philippines as the second country with the most pessimistic attitude about corruption and the second ranked RP as the third most corrupt country in Asia, next to Indonesia and Vietnam. Given these indicators, he called on government leaders to muster political will to fight corruption. He also urged the Ombudsman to act on the recently concluded report on the P 728 million fertilizer fund scam.

The Coalition Against Corruption, represented by Mr. Guillermo Luz, pointed out two concerns: first is how do we expect lower level officials to be professional when senior officials do not set right examples, and the second is the dismissal of civil servants who refuse to obey illegal orders. These are cause for concern for the majority of honest civil servants employed by the government. The statement also called on the Ombudsman to remain independent in investigating three important cases: the Gen. Garcia case, the Comelec case, and the fertilizer fund scam.

Read the speeches of Senator Franklin Drilon and Mr Guillermo Luz .

Gen. Garcia’s family to face arrest

9 March 2006—The Sandiganbayan Second Division yesterday ordered the arrest of Gen. Carlos F. Garcia’s wife Clarita, and three sons Ian Carl, Juan Paolo and Timothy Mark. This is in connection with the plunder case filed by the Office of the Ombudsman against them in April 2005. They are found to have violated the Plunder law by amassing ill-gotten wealth totaling an estimated P 303,272,005.99. While comptroller of the Armed Forces from March 2001 to April 2004, Gen. Garcia received commissions, kickbacks and benefits related to his authority over contracts. This 303 million consists of real property in the Philippines and the US, luxury vehicles, peso and dollar bank deposits and other investments.

The charge sheet describes Garcia’s wife and sons as “conduits and willing receptacles” for the said activity. Plunder as provided for in RA 7080 is a capital offense and is non-bailable.

Improving Governance to Reduce Poverty

12 May 2005 – The Office of the Ombudsman (OMB) celebrated its 17th foundation anniversary by launching the European Commission (EC)-OMB Corruption Prevention Project. The EC funded project aims to improve service delivery to the poor and enhance the country’s foreign investment and trade standing by focusing on preventing corruption. The project will have four basic components: (1) collaboration with civil society organizations; (2) winning the cooperation of the wider public; (3) cooperation with other government agencies to prevent corruption; and (4) management requirement of the OMB.

Download detailed project description

Ombudsman's Rules on Gifts

To uphold the highest standards of honesty and integrity in the institution, Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo has prohibited his officials from soliciting gifts or benefits for themselves or for others. Under Office Order No. 05-15, OMB officials and employees cannot accept gifts, directly or indirectly, from the counsel, accused, suppliers and contractors, among others. Accepting or giving gifts from relatives may be allowed if they do not fall under the categories which are prohibited. However, gifts valued at P2,000 or more should be recorded in the Registry Book kept by the Internal Affairs Board (IAB).
More

High Profile Cases

The success of the campaign against graft and corruption cannot just simply be measured by the number of cases disposed of or by the number of assistance rendered to the public. This has to be amplified by the identification of prominent leaders and personalities, big fish as they say, brought to the bar of justice forsuch corrupt acts and practices. This is essential to clearly send a message that the Office can never be deterred from fulfilling its mandate, however wealthy and powerful the grafters may be.
More




Under the law, the Ombudsman and his deputies have the duty to prevent and prosecute graft and corruption in government. But to effectively prosecute erring officials and employees, it is important to identify the violation and the position held by the government official or employee concerned.