Ombudsman Boying Remulla may revisit the so-called “secret” decision of his predecessor, retired Samuel Martires, reversing a 2016 dismissal order against Senator Joel Villanueva, a lawyer said Wednesday, dispelling concerns of double jeopardy. 

Atty. Rico Domingo, former president of the Philippine Bar Association and chairperson of the Movement Against Disinformation, stated that nothing legally prevents Remulla from reopening the nearly decade-old case and launching a new investigation, unless it has been elevated to the Sandiganbayan for trial. 

Domingo explained that double jeopardy does not apply in Villanueva’s case since Martires granted the senator’s motion for reconsideration, resulting in an effective dismissal, which prevented it from reaching the Sandiganbayan. 

“There’s no double jeopardy because it hasn’t been filed in the Sandiganbayan yet…So, Senator Villanueva would not be able to invoke the doctrine of double jeopardy,” Domingo stated partly in Filipino.

Domingo’s remarks contradict former Supreme Court associate justice Adolfo Azcuna’s position that Remulla cannot reopen Villanueva’s case, as doing so could violate the double jeopardy clause.

Under the law, double jeopardy can only be invoked when specific requisites are met, including that a person cannot be tried twice for the same offense. 

Earlier, Villanueva confirmed that the Ombudsman had already cleared him of all the charges. He also showed a Sandiganbayan clearance, stating that he had no pending cases in the court.

Domingo said Villanueva may contest the reopening of the case, but maintained that, “It will not bar the honorable Ombudsman to re-examine the veracity of the charges against [the senator].”

He referenced the case of former Energy Secretary Alfonso Cusi and several others, whom the Ombudsman recently indicted despite having initially dismissed the same case involving the Malamapaya gas project in 2022. 

“That can be a replay of what had happened with Senator Villanueva at the time,” Domingo averred. 

Furthermore, if the review confirms an anomaly in Martires' reversal of Villanueva’s dismissal order, then the former ombudsman may face appropriate sanctions and be held legally liable, according to Domingo.

Martires confirmed that he granted Villanueva’s petition in 2019, challenging a 2016 dismissal order issued by his predecessor, Conchita Carpio-Morales. 

Remulla criticized Martires’ decision as “secret,” implying that the ruling was deliberately kept from the public and that the Senate was not even informed about it.

Morales’ decision states that Villanueva was guilty of grave misconduct, serious dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the interest of service due to the alleged misuse of P10 million in his pork barrel funds during his tenure as a Cibac party-list lawmaker in 2008.

The dismissal order also carries an accessory penalty of perpetual disqualification from holding public office.