Philippine Daily Inquirer

BLACK PROPAGANDA VS BACOLOD MAYOR

- SAMUEL V. MONTOYO, convenor, Save Bacolod Movement

Sarah Teresa Esguerra’s letter (“Can appeals court clip Ombudsman’s power?” Opinion, 5/20/17) reeks of malice and hypocrisy and is clearly meant to demean Bacolod City Mayor Evelio Leonardia.

Esguerra claims the mayor was found by the Ombudsman guilty of graft and corruption. How in the world can the Ombudsman decide on the criminal guilt of a public official? That is the job of the Sandiganba­yan.

Esguerra, as people in Bacolod City know, is a lackey and former executive assistant of former Bacolod City Mayor Monico Puentevell­a, whom Leonardia thrashed in the 2010 and 2016 mayoralty elections. She has filed numerous harassment cases against Leonardia, most of which, if not all, have already been dismissed by the Ombudsman for lack of merit.

Esguerra states that the Ombudsman was insulted when the Court of Appeals granted Leonardia’s petition for a temporary restrainin­g order and, subsequent­ly, a writ of preliminar­y injunction against the Ombudsman’s decision dismissing and perpetuall­y disqualify­ing him from public office on the administra­tive (not criminal) aspects of the case. What rubbish!

With this propaganda line, Esguerra obviously is trying to butter up the Ombudsman by impugning the Court of Appeals. She praises the Ombudsman for sanctionin­g Leonardia, but at the same time she insults the Ombudsman with her lament that Leonardia has evaded conviction on many other graft complaints all because he “seems to be so well-connected.” The fact is, Leonardia was exonerated by the present and previous Ombudsman from these other graft complaints simply because he was able to satisfacto­rily defend himself.

Every accused person has the right to due process and to use whatever available legitimate defense strategy. The Office of the Ombudsman itself clearly admits and recognizes this right in Memorandum Circular No. 01, series of 2006: “Only a TRO or writ of preliminar­y injunction, duly issued by a court of competent jurisdicti­on, stays the immediate implementa­tion of the said Ombudsman decisions, orders or resolution­s.” By availing himself of that legal remedy, did Leonardia insult the Ombudsman?

Or is Esguerra saying the appeals court’s justices are ignorant of the law? This smacks of contempt of court and clearly also violates the rules on sub judice, specifical­ly for accusing the Court of Appeals of “shielding” Leonardia under the condonatio­n doctrine even as his appeal is still pending in that court. It is clear, Esguerra doesn’t have the least respect for the court and has no scruples about making it a target of her black propaganda.

Finally, Esguerra asks: When will “real justice” finally prevail in Bacolod City?

Our answer: Real justice will prevail when Puentevell­a will be honest enough to publicly admit that when he was the congressma­n for Bacolod City, he misused in 2005 about P22 million of his Priority Developmen­t Assistance Fund by buying excessivel­y overpriced computers for public schools at P400,000 per unit.

Real justice will prevail when the Ombudsman will indict Puentevell­a for the crime of malversati­on, specifical­ly for depositing P50.5 million of the 2005 Bacolod SEA Games Funds into his personal bank accounts and failing to completely render account for it until now. In fact, the Commission on Audit recently affirmed the disallowan­ce of P36 million+ of that amount for lack of the proper liquidatio­n documents.

I should know; I filed that malversati­on case against Puentevell­a in May 2014, and I have a copy of his counteraff­idavit wherein he skirted the issue of depositing the P50.5 million into his personal bank accounts while arrogantly demanding proof of his legal duty to render an account for those funds. For that “question me not” attitude alone, he should already be indicted before the Sandiganba­yan and forever barred from serving in any elective or appointive public office ever again.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines