Bust Senate gang
Carpio-Morales ruled in 2016 that Villanueva and nine others were guilty of administrative offenses — grave misconduct, serious dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.
Daily TribuneCarpio-Morales ruled in 2016 that Villanueva and nine others were guilty of administrative offenses — grave misconduct, serious dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.
A battle of wills is expected if Ombudsman Boying Remulla pursues the dismissal from the Senate of Joel Villanueva, who produced, out of nowhere, an order from the anti-graft body clearing him of all the charges.
Former Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales had ordered Villanueva’s disqualification from holding public office in 2016.
When Villanueva was a representative of the Cibac Party-list in 2008, his office was allotted P10 million from the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) for agricultural products intended for farmers in the Davao Region.
The PDAF was declared unconstitutional in a 2013 landmark Supreme Court decision.
Investigations into the PDAF showed that Villanueva’s project had “ghost beneficiaries.”
Carpio-Morales ruled in 2016 that Villanueva and nine others were guilty of administrative offenses — grave misconduct, serious dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.
Aside from the administrative aspect, criminal complaints were also filed against Villanueva for graft, malversation, and falsification of public documents.
As a penalty in the administrative case, Carpio-Morales ordered Villanueva’s dismissal from public service and his perpetual disqualification from holding public office.
A senator in 2016, it was the Senate’s “old boy’s club” that saved Villanueva’s skin after the chamber voted not to enforce Carpio-Morales’s order, arguing that it had its own disciplinary mechanism through its ethics committee.
No disciplinary action of any sort was taken against Villanueva, and the Senate action freed him from accountability.
Last 23 October, Remulla indicated that he would write to Senate President Tito Sotto to finally enforce Carpio-Morales’s dismissal order against Villanueva.
Lo and behold, Villanueva produced an order from Remulla’s predecessor, Samuel Martires, reversing the dismissal order, a reversal known only to Villanueva and Martires.
As much as the order to disqualify Villanueva from holding public office can be reversed, Remulla also has the power to revive the case, according to retired Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio.
“There’s no prescriptive period stated in the law. I think it can be revived. It can’t just be ignored indefinitely. Ultimately, it will be up to the present Senate to decide what to do,” Carpio said.
If Sotto does not act on it, Remulla should elevate the matter to the Supreme Court to seek clarity.
The Constitution mandates the Ombudsman to recommend dismissal, but it’s unclear whether the Senate President alone can decide or if the entire Senate must vote on its enforcement.
What needs to be clarified is whether the Senate President can sit on it or must submit it to a vote.
Carpio said what cannot be denied is that there was a recommendation from Ombudsman Carpio-Morales, and then Senate President Koko Pimentel had received it.
The spineless Villanueva has since sought refuge in the Senate, ensuring his continued stay in the chamber to evade accountability for his misdeeds.
And now the senator has been implicated in the flood control scandal, which will make him cling tighter to the safe haven provided by the supposedly august chamber.
Villanueva and his ilk, who exploit the Senate clique to frustrate the law, are among the reasons for the public outrage and mistrust of government institutions.
The Senate is mainly made up of individuals who claim entitlement after being elected to office.
Villanueva is an extreme example who uses both religion and politics to dodge answering to the law and he should be barred from the government.