Graft buster’s 2018 removal reversed

The Supreme Court (SC) has voided the dismissal of former Overall Deputy Ombudsman Melchor Arthur Carandang for his involvement in an investigation into the wealth of then President Rodrigo Duterte, ruling that the Office of the President lacked the authority to discipline officials of the independent constitutional body.

In a 28-page decision made public on Saturday, 2 May, the Court’s Third Division affirmed a Court of Appeals ruling that nullified the 30 July 2018 decision of the Office of the President, which had found Carandang administratively liable for grave misconduct, graft and corruption, and betrayal of public trust, and ordered his dismissal from the government service.

Carandang was involved in the Office of the Ombudsman’s handling of a plunder complaint filed by Senator Antonio Trillanes IV against Duterte, which included the latter’s bank records.

In media interviews, Carandang stated that documents from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) were “similar” to those provided by Trillanes and that they referenced evidence of substantial money flows or ill-gotten wealth connected to Duterte.

The Office of the President, via then Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea, found him liable for graft and corruption under RA 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, specifically for alleged manifest partiality, divulging confidential information, and causing undue injury or giving unwarranted advantage; betrayal of public trust and violations of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials; grave misconduct and dishonesty for misusing or disclosing confidential information from the investigation.

The dismissal order imposed penalties, including the forfeiture of benefits, perpetual disqualification from public office, and cancellation of eligibility.

Trillanes’ ally

The charges stemmed from complaints filed by groups like the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption and other lawyers accusing him of bias in favor of Trillanes and improperly publicizing details adverse to Duterte.

He had earlier been suspended for 90 days in January 2018 on similar grounds.

The Office of the Ombudsman under Samuel Martires later implemented the order. Carandang appealed, but it was enforced in 2019.

The High Court also struck down related issuances, including a 14 June 2019 order from then Ombudsman Martires implementing the presidential directive and ordering Carandang to stop performing his duties, effectively declaring his post vacant.

Carandang was removed following his handling of sensitive reports related to Duterte’s alleged wealth, which triggered administrative proceedings against him during his tenure as Deputy Ombudsman.

The SC held that the Office of the Ombudsman is an independent constitutional body, and the Office of the President had “no jurisdiction to impose administrative sanctions on its officials.”

Allowing such authority would undermine constitutional checks and balances, it underscored.

Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh penned the 28-page decision, affirming the Court of Appeals ruling that declared Carandang’s dismissal void ab initio.

The decision described the act as a violation of the constitutional principle of checks and balances.