Proposed amendment on Ombudsman Act

of 1989 only tolerates incompetence— Rep.

Remulla

The proposed amendment to the Ombudsman Act of 1989 that would allow private lawyers to act as prosecutors in various graft cases is a mere palliative to the growing credibility problem of the Office of the Ombudsman and would not really provide an effective and permanent frontline defense against graft and corruption.

Cavite Congressman Gilbert Remulla today made this position following the announcement of House Justice Committee Chair Rep. Marcelino Libanan that his committee is set to approve the proposed amendments to the Ombudsman Act of 1989.

Remulla said that contrary to Libanan’s claim that the proposal would strengthen the Office of the Ombudsman, it would only tolerate the incompetence of some of its prosecutors.

He said that in fact, Congress need not pass legislation to make the Ombudsman more effective in its fight against graft and corruption as long as it is run under the highest standard of professionalism. 

“ With due respect to my colleagues who are pushing for the amendment of the Ombudsman Act of 1989 but I really can’t see any logic why we should pass this piece of legislation. It’s purpose is very shortsighted and offers no permanent solution to the growing credibility problem of the Office of the Ombudsman,” Remulla said.

The only way to make the Office of the Ombudsman more effective is to ensure that its prosecutors are determined and highly competent in carrying out their mandate. 

He said the Office of the Ombudsman, and even the Department of Justice (DO) should only hire the best and the brightest to ensure that its battery of prosecutors are competent enough to handle high-profile cases.

What should amended, Remulla proposed, is the Salary Standardization Law so that government prosecutors would be among those who are exempted from the salary ceiling set under the law. The budget of the Office of the Ombudsman should be also increased.

Remulla said this would provide a more lucrative compensation package for the prosecution service to entice idealistic and high-caliber lawyers. And to further enhance their skills in all aspects of litigation, government prosecutors should be also given regular and all-expense paid training and educational opportunities here and abroad.

On the other hand, those who are unfit to do their job should be either dismissed or relegated to less sensitive tasks, he added.

Libanan, in defending the proposal, said that high-caliber private lawyers are denied the opportunity to take part in prosecution graft cases, particularly those that were filed against high-ranking government officials because this is prohibited under the Ombudsman Act of 1989.

Libanan and other supporters of the bill noted that “ some cases filed by the Ombudsman did not prosper because of the lack of training, techniques, study and research by government prosecutors.”

“ How can this happen when in fact the Office of the Ombudsman, next to the DOJ, should be considered the biggest and best-equipped law firm in the country? In terms of personnel and equipment that are at the disposal of the Office of the Ombudsman, I simply cannot understand why private law firms can be better in any litigation,” Remulla said.

Remulla also pointed out that getting the services of private lawyers to perform the mandate of government prosecutors under the Office of the Ombudsman-- even if they do this pro bono—does not provide a long-term guarantee that the Ombudsman will be more effective in prosecuting graft and corruption cases.

The young Cavite solon said that instead of making the job easier for the Office of the Ombudsman, the measure might even cause delays in the prosecution of graft cases because of potential differences among government prosecutors and their private counterparts in terms of legal strategy and tactics.

“Instead of coming out with a cohesive approach in the prosecution of cases, there is a great danger that government prosecutors and their private counterparts would be locked in a clash of opinion on how they would go about in handling their cases. Too many cooks spoil the broth so to speak,” Remulla said.