Sweeping out the corrupt

“EdnaHerrera-Batacan, Rody’s former counsel will be made to reveal the identity of the perpetrator’s alleged corrupt practice at the anti-graft office.

Former Associate Supreme Court (SC) Justice now the newly appointed Ombudsman Samuel Martires appears bent on cleaning up the Ombudsman’s office of corruption.

In his first announcement Monday, he stated that he would demand answers from Rody’s former lawyer, who had earlier applied for the Ombudsman’s position and who had admitted that she had to fork out money to a corrupt officer or official at the Ombudsman’s office for a “parking fee” which is a practice resorted to delay the results of the investigation at this agency.

Martires stressed to reporters that Edna Herrera-Batacan, Rody’s former counsel, will be made to reveal the identity of the perpetrator’s alleged corrupt practice at the anti-graft office, as part of his priorities in his drive to look into corruption claims.

Martires was quoted as saying that he would ask Batacan to name the employee.

“I will be demanding from Atty. Batacan for her to identify the officer or employee she gave money to, she said, as parking fee,” Martires told reporters after the last flag-raising ceremonies at the SC.

He also said he did not mean to summon Batacan but failed to make clear whether he would be filing a case against her, saying that he merely wanted her to cooperate with him.

If he does summon Batacan just to get the identity of the officer in the Ombudsman’s office then charge her, then Martires is not going to get the officer identified and as long as he/she remains unidentified, it would be very difficult to get that “parking fee officer/official” charged before the Sandiganbayan.

Presumably, Martires wants to charge this person who asks for parking fee and bring the case to court. But he should look further. After all, a lowly employee can hardly delay complaints/cases without the cooperation of higher officials.

It will be recalled that during her interview by the Judicial and Bar Council panel as an applicant for the Ombudsman’s post, Batacan accused the anti-graft office of being “graft-ridden” and counted herself among its alleged preys.

“I’m a victim also, I know for a fact how it operates. Inordinate delay is contrary to the speedy disposition of cases. They have such a thing as parking fee in that office. When the case is filed and it’s under preliminary investigation, they will say, ‘Okay, I will just keep it on hold for resolution. I will just keep it on hold then you pay me parking fee,’” Batacan had said, quoting the “parking attendant.”

Batacan’s statement got the gander of the highly partisan and practitioner of selective justice, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales as she immediately shot back at Batacan’s claim saying: “If you are party to corruption, then you are corrupt yourself.”

Some found Morales’ remark odd for the government’s prime investigator and graft buster, in that she, then still the Ombudsman, should have quickly ordered a full-dress probe into the charges of Batacan instead of Morales turning the alleged crime of corruption against the lawyer, instead of one or even many of her employees/officials who allegedly committed corruption.

“While the new Ombudsman is serious about going after the corrupt.

Morales is so quick to indict the political foes of her political patron even when the evidence is much too flimsy. Why, she is even known to recommend as “state witnesses” confirmed perjurers and even goes to the extent of presenting manufactured evidence against whoever the yellow president wants her to bring down.

Recall that during the impeachment trial of then sitting chief justice, the late Renato Corona whom she wanted impeached, she, a witness for the prosecution, manufactured claimed documents of Corona’s dollar bank account which amount of $1 million, she had multiplied claiming that he had $12 million in over 100 bank accounts, even perjuring herself when she claimed that these documents that were illegally obtained as having come from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC).

That was not the only time Morales did this. She did it again when her deputy Ombudsman presented bank statements to the media purportedly coming from the AMLC showing at least P2 billion in Rody Duterte’s accounts. Morales was out to scalp Rody.

This documents were denied by the AMLC and it was clear that the documents shown by the deputy Ombudsman were not AMLC bank documents that were manufactured by Duterte foe, Sen. Antonio Trillanes, who claimed to have “exposed” the corruption of Duterte.

This was clearly manufactured by both Morales and her deputy as she went all out to confirm her deputy’s documents as AMLC documents.

Morales refused to admit that the documents came from Trillanes, despite the fact that the papers came from Trillanes, as later admitted by the deputy Ombudsman.

Perhaps while the new Ombudsman is serious about going after the corrupt, past and present in the Ombudsman’s office, Martires should try to probe the “manufacturing ways” of the deputies as well as the parking fees being paid and to whom the paid parking fees are forwarded such as a higher official.