Ombudsman Boying Remulla on Thursday labeled a decision reversing a 2016 dismissal order against Senator Joel Villanueva a “surprise” and “secret” penned by his predecessor, retired Samuel Martires. 

Remulla was supposed to draft a letter requesting Senate President Tito Sotto to immediately enforce the dismissal order issued by former ombudsman Conchita Morales, who had found Villanueva guilty of grave misconduct, serious dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the interest of service over the alleged misuse of his P10-million pork barrel funds during his tenure as a Cibac partylist lawmaker in 2008.

He, however, stopped short after Martires revealed that the same had been dismissed in 2019. 

“It’s a surprise, secret decision that came out. Nobody was raising that issue before. Joel Villanueva kept quiet through all the years. Ombudsman Martires never spoke about it. It’s like a secret decision, right? Nobody knows about it,” he told reporters. 

The Ombudsman posits that the ruling was deliberately kept secret, claiming that the Senate, including Sotto, was not even informed about it. 

“They just released it now. So don’t you call that a secret decision?” Remulla averred.

Villanueva, in response, showed what appears to be a decision from the Ombudsman, clearing him of all the charges. 

“In fact, there is no probable cause against Villanueva… The signatures appearing on top of his name were obviously forged,” read the supposed ruling dated 31 July 2019. 

In addition, the senator also showed a Sandiganbayan clearance, stating that he had no pending cases in the court.

The Ombudsman’s dismissal order against Villanueva also carries an accessory penalty of perpetual disqualification from holding public office.

However, the Senate then did not enforce the directive, citing an alleged lack of the Ombudsman's jurisdiction over members of Congress.

Sotto was then the chair of the Senate committee on rules, who proposed adopting the legal recommendation of the Senate’s counsel, declaring that the Ombudsman has no disciplinary authority over members of Congress and, therefore, has no jurisdiction over administrative offenses committed by its members, citing Section 20 of Republic Act 6770.

Villanueva said he already anticipated such “harassment,” but Remulla disputed it.

“It’s not harassment. It’s something everybody fixed to be still valid that turned out to be not valid anymore due to a ‘secret decision,’” Remulla pointed out.

Nonetheless, the Ombudsman said they will study what further steps can be taken regarding the nearly decade-old decision.