Ombudsman in the Philippines PDF

Ombudsman I. Introduction A. Definition of ombudsman The ombudsman of the Philippines is an ombudsman responsible for investigating and prosecuting Philippine government officials accused of crimes, especially graft and corruption. B. Importance of having an ombudsman in a country The Office of the...

Ombudsman I. Introduction A. Definition of ombudsman The ombudsman of the Philippines is an ombudsman responsible for investigating and prosecuting Philippine government officials accused of crimes, especially graft and corruption. B. Importance of having an ombudsman in a country The Office of the Ombudsman is of such importance it is only one of two government institutions that the Constitution describes with a special phrase. In Article XI, Section 12, we read: “The Ombudsman and his Deputies, as protectors of the people, shall act promptly on complaints…” That is an echo of the much more familiar (and controversial) phrase we find in Article II, Section 3, which reads in part: “The Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people and the State.” This philosophy of protection has dual aspects. The military safeguards against external threats like invaders, while the Ombudsman and Deputies guard against internal threats like grafters. C. Overview of the ombudsman system in the Philippines II. History of the Ombudsman in the Philippines Origins The OMBUDSMAN is a time-tested institution which evolved in the Scandinavian countries. It was aimed at giving the common people a tribunal to which they can readily ventilate their grievances against the government. King Charles XII of Sweden is generally credited with initiating the office of the ombudsman. An official with the title of Hogsta Ombudsman (Supreme Royal Ombudsman) was appointed in 1713. He was assigned to “keep an eye on royal officials” and supervise observance of the laws. Timeline 1898 - Article 21 of the Decree of June 23, 1898 creating the Revolutionary Government of the Philippines provided for a Permanent Commission, presided over by the Vice President, that shall decide on appeal all criminal cases decided by provincial councils. 1950 - An Integrity Board was created by President Quirino in 1950. 1957 - President Magsaysay immediately upon assumption to office created the Presidential Complaints and Action Commission. 1958 - President Garcia created the Presidential Committee on Administration Performance Efficiency 1962 - President Macapagal created a Presidential Anti-Graft Committee in 1962. 1966 - Marcos created a Presidential Agency on Reforms and Government Operations. 1969 - The Office of the Citizen’s Counselor was created by Republic Act No. 6028. However, like the previous agencies created by past administrations, the functions of the Citizen’s counselor were mainly to conduct fact-finding investigations and to make recommendations to Congress and the President. 1973 - The 1973 Constitution (Sections 5 and 6, Article XIII) provided for the establishment of a special court known as the Sandiganbayan and an Office of the Ombudsman known as the Tanodbayan. 1987 - The framers of the 1987 Constitution envisioned the Ombudsman as an official critic who studies the laws, procedures and practices in government, a mobilizer who ensures that the steady flow of services is accorded the citizens, and a watchdog who looks at the general and specific performance of all government officials and employees. 1989 - The Congress enacted Republic Act No. 6770, otherwise known as the Ombudsman Act of 1989, providing for the functional and structural organization of the Office of the Ombudsman and delineating its powers functions and duties. Mandate THE OMBUDSMAN AND HIS DEPUTIES, as protectors of the people shall act promptly on complaints filed in any form or manner against officers or employees of the Government, or of any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled corporations, and enforce their administrative, civil and criminal liability in every case where the evidence warrants in order to promote efficient service by the Government to the people (Section 13, R.A. No. 6770; see also Section 12 Article XI of the 1987 Constitution). The Ombudsman shall give priority to complaints filed against high ranking government officials and/or those occupying supervisory positions, complaints involving grave offenses as well as complaints involving large sums of money and/or properties (Sec. 15, R.A. No. 6770). C. Role of the ombudsman in promoting accountability and transparency in government III. Mechanisms to Ensure Accountability A. Investigative & prosecutorial powers of the ombudsman 1. Authority to investigate complaints against public officials Section 13 (1) of Article XI of the 1987 Constitution vests the Ombudsman with the power to “investigate any act or omission of any public official, employee, office or agency, xxx.” This constitutional power to investigate does not include the power to prosecute. The Ombudsman’s prosecutorial powers are conferred by Section 15 of RA 6770, which vests the Ombudsman the power to “investigate and prosecute any act or omission of any public official, employee, xxx.” This power to investigate and prosecute is constricted by Section 22 of RA 6770, which limits the investigation of impeachable officials only for the purpose of filing a complaint for impeachment. Since the members of Congress are not impeachable officials, they can be investigated and prosecuted by the Ombudsman during their tenure. The disciplinary power of the Ombudsman generates an “administrative case,” while the prosecutorial power of the Ombudsman generates a “criminal case.” To initiate prosecution at the Sandiganbayan, the Ombudsman must make a finding of probable cause. 2. Power to recommend disciplinary actions or criminal charges Section 13 (3) of Article XI of the Constitution empowers the Ombudsman to “direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action against a public official or employee at fault, and recommend his removal, suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure compliance therewith.” The constitutional disciplinary authority of the Ombudsman is merely recommendatory. On the other hand, Section 21 of RA 6770 vests the Ombudsman with “disciplinary authority over all elective and appointive officials of the Government and its subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies. This statutory disciplinary authority of the Ombudsman is “executory.” Due to the supremacy of the Constitution over laws or statutes, the limitation on the disciplinary powers of the Ombudsman under Section 21 of RA 6770 cannot diminish the disciplinary powers conferred by the Constitution. In the same vein, RA 6770 cannot expand the constitutional disciplinary powers of the Ombudsman to make it “executory” instead of being merely recommendatory. Their recourse would be to endorse the recommendation for disciplinary measure to the ethics committee, which will then act on the Ombudsman referral on the basis of its own rules and independent determination of facts and issues. IV. Challenges Faced by the Ombudsman System A. Political interference and pressure on investigations B. Lack of resources and manpower to effectively carry out its mandate 1. Inadequate funding for operations 2.Shortage of qualified staff