New anti-corruption body has ‘no power over Ombud, SC’
Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon yesterday said the new anti-corruption commission created by President Rodrigo Duterte cannot be used to discipline members, officials and employees of the Ombudsman and the judiciary.
“We laud the intention of Executive Order No. 43 if it is really to assist the President in investigating and/or hearing administrative cases primarily involving graft and or corruption against all presidential appointees in the executive branch,” Drilon said.
“However, the executive order cannot be extended outside the executive branch without violating the core principles of independence and checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution,” he added.
EO 43 created the Presidential Anti-Corruption Commission, whose mandate is to “directly assist the President in investigating and/or hearing administrative cases primarily involving graft and or corruption against all presidential appointees.”
Drilon explained that by virtue of constitutional independence, the EO cannot be used to discipline or recommend actions against any member, official and employee of other branches of government, including Congress, the Judiciary, Civil Service Commission, Commission on Audit, Commission on Elections, Commission on Human Rights, and the Office of the Ombudsman.
Drilon said the Supreme Court, in many cases, upheld the constitutional independence of the Ombudsman and disallowed the President from removing or disciplining officials belonging to the constitutional bodies.
Drilon said Section 5 (c) of the EO “may be legally challenged” as an infringement on the independence of other branches of government and constitutional bodies.
This provision states that “upon instructions of the President, or motu proprio, the Commission may also conduct lifestyle checks and fact-finding inquiries on acts or omissions of all presidential appointees, including those outside of the Executive Branch of government, which may be violative of
What we want to prevent here is a situation wherein constitutional offices would be under the mercy of the executive that they are mandated to investigate. SENATE MINORITY LEADER FRANKLIN DRILON
the Constitution, or contrary to law, rules and regulations, and/ or constitute serious misconduct tantamount to betrayal of public trust.”
Citing Gonzales v. Office of the President (GR 196231), Drilon said that constitutional bodies such as the Ombudsman, by virtue of its constitutional independence, may not be removed or disciplined by the President.
Drilon said “the limitation of the power of the President to discipline the members of these constitutional bodies is to preserve its independence and isolate them from the President’s influence and political pressure.”
“What we want to prevent here is a situation wherein constitutional offices would be, in effect, under the mercy of the executive that they are mandated to investigate,” Drilon said.
Drilon further said that only the heads of these constitutional bodies can discipline their personnel, while it is the duty of Congress to investigate and prosecute impeachable officials.