Should the Ombudsman resign?

PERRYSCOPE
Perry Diaz

Recently, Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez was under fire for a lot of controversial things that piled up since she was appointed by then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in December 2005. Up until June 30, 2010 -- when Gloria stepped down -- Gutierrez was untouchable. Not anymore.

The first impeachment petition against Gutierrez in March 2009 failed because it was alleged the Gloria bribed most of those who signed the impeachment petition to withdraw their signatures. As a result only 30 congressmen’s signatures remained on the petition which was not enough to meet the one-third minimum requirement for an impeachment complaint to progress.

Gloria’s “power of patronage” -- or in some instances, “power of bribery” -- became the trademark of her presidency. And Gutierrez, an intimate friend of Gloria’s husband Mike Arroyo during their college days, had the support of Gloria for as long as Gutierrez protected the First Couple from charges of graft and corruption. It was a perfect arrangement for their mutual preservation.

Recently, Gutierrez held a press conference to defend herself from calls for her resignation. She declared that she would not give in to calls for her resignation and proclaimed: “There are no grounds for me to be impeached.” But she also said that she would leave her fate to Congress if her detractors would file a complaint. It was a brazen display of defiance. “Catch me if you can” seems to be the veiled message she sent to people who want her out. However, during the question and answer segment with the media, she blinked excessively, a telltale sign that she was being dishonest.

“In the discharge of our official functions we adhere to the rule of law and the Constitution. In deciding cases, we rely solely on the evidence uncovered or presented to our investigators or prosecutors,” she said. However, the issue is not “no evidence uncovered”; the issue is “not digging deeper and wide enough to uncover evidence.” In other words, Gutierrez was not proactive enough to follow the scent of illegal activities allegedly committed by the First Couple and their cohorts. But she was too quick to exonerate them of any wrongdoing.

An impeachment petition awaits Gutierrez when the 15th Congress opens on July 26, 2010. The petition will be filed by Rep. Risa Hontiveros and several other House members. She said that Gutierrez is the single biggest obstacle in the delivery of justice. “For the longest time, Congress was seen as the plaything of Mrs. Arroyo and her cronies. From being a rubberstamp congress of Mrs. Arroyo, it has the opportunity to rise to the occasion to be on the side of the people,” she said.

The fight against corruption requires extraordinary measures and it starts with the Office of the Ombudsman. Gloria knew that too well. That’s why the P728-million fertilizer scam, “Hello Garci” election cheating scandal, the $329-million NBN-ZTE deal, and slew of other corruption cases involving the Arroyos were never prosecuted because of Gutierrez’s closeness to the Arroyos.

About a month before Gloria stepped down, the Office of the Ombudsman cleared Gloria and Mike Arroyo of liability in the NBN-ZTE deal. However, the Ombudsman recommended filing criminal and administrative charges against former Comelec chairman Benjamin Abalos and Social Security System president Romulo Neri. Gutierrez said that the president was immune from lawsuits. True, but how about Mike Arroyo?

Recently, former agriculture secretary Luis “Cito” Lorenzo -- who was implicated in the fertilizer scam together with former undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-joc” Bolante -- came back from self-exile in the Untied States. Immediately, the Ombudsman filed misappropriation and malversation charges against Lorenzo and Bolante. Why weren’t they charged with plunder when P728 million is way over the P50-million threshold for plunder?
The answer is simple: If they were charged with plunder, the case could reach as high up as Gloria and Mike Arroyo. But with a case of misappropriation and malversation of public funds, Lorenzo and Bolante may only get a “slap on the wrist” and the Arroyos would go scot-free. On the other hand, plunder is a non-bailable charge and a conviction could mete the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

In 2005, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism conducted its own investigation and discovered that a large portion of the P728-million fertilizer funds was released to fictitious -- or “ghost” -- foundations. In December that year, the Senate joint committees chaired by Senator Ramon Magsaysay Jr. issued a report which concluded that the fertilizer funds intended for farmers were diverted by Bolante for the 2004 electoral campaign of Gloria. According to the report, collaborative testimonies from Agriculture officials, 13 farmer groups, Commission on Audit officials, the Budget Secretary, and alleged “runners” of Bolante indicated that the “farmers did not get a single farm input or implement” in 2004.

Lorenzo said that he’s now willing to talk to clear his name. He might even turn state witness against Bolante and others including Gloria and Mike Arroyo. Many believe that Lorenzo was not involved in the fertilizer scam.

In “A Nation Unborn,” author Maria Linda Olaguer Montayre wrote: “Our ‘deep throat’ at the DA [Department of Agriculture] told us that Sec. Cito Lorenzo was already six months in office before he realized that documents were being approved and funds disbursed without his knowledge. Thus the huge allocations of P432M, P728M, P544M and P1.1B or a total of P2.8B were right under his very nose but they all breezed past him until Marlene Esperat et. al. filed a complaint for anomaly that was the P432M DA scam.” But the case did not flourish after Esperat was murdered in March 2005. While the hired killers were eventually caught and convicted, the masterminds were never revealed and brought to justice. However, many believed that her murder may be related to the investigation of the fertilizer scam.

Although the fertilizer scam was perpetrated before Gutierrez became Ombudsman, the case filed by Esperat is shelved under Gutierrez’s watch. In my opinion, the fertilizer scam is not a case of misappropriation and malversation of public funds, it is a case of plunder and, possibly, murder.

The impeachment complaint against Gutierrez is the worst of its kind -- betrayal of public trust. She has betrayed 90 million Filipinos and they cry for justice. Gutierrez is like a cork that plugs a bottle. Unless the cork is removed, the content of the bottle will not flow out. Similarly, unless Gutierrez resigns or is impeached, justice will be bottled up and not served.
(PerryDiaz@gmail. com)