OSG asks SC: Compel ombudsman to file homicide raps vs Noy.

The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) yesterday asked the Supreme Court (SC) to order the Office of the Ombudsman to file 44 counts of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide against former president Benigno Aquino III and two former police generals.

Solicitor General Jose Calida filed a 45-page manifestation intervening in the case filed by the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC) against the Office of the Ombudsman, former president Aquino, former PNP chief Alan Purisima and former SAF chief Getulio Napeñas.

The Ombudsman had initially only charged Aquino, Purisima and Napenas one count each of graft and usurpation of officials functions before the Sandiganbayan and dismissed the reckless imprudence resulting in homicide complaint against them.

Calida also asked the SC to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) and/or writ of preliminary injunction be issued to prevent the arraignment on Feb. 15 before the Fourth Division of the Sandiganbayan.

He also requested the high court to annul, reverse or set aside the consolidated order dated Sept. 5, 2017 and the consolidated resolution dated June 13, 2017 issued by the Office of the Ombudsman insofar as the orders dismissed the complaint for reckless imprudence resulting in multiple homicide against Aquino and the two former police generals.

Calida said that Aquino approved the PNP-SAF “Oplan Exodus” mission to apprehend international terrorists Zulfikli bin Hir, also known as Marwan, and Ahmad Akmad Batabol Usman, aka Basit Usman.

During the Senate hearing it was mentioned that the government sent an insufficient number of SAF men to the lair of the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF) and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) to conduct the mission.

Even the Senate said that “the most fatal mistake” made by those who planned the mission was the decision not to make prior coordination with the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).

“In addition, respondent Aquino allowed the suspended PNP chief Purisima, not only to participate in the planning but also in the running of the operation and even in giving some information and intelligence whilst the operation was ongoing as he communicated with respondent Aquino via SMS on Jan. 25, 2015. Hence, it was criminally imprudent on the part of respondent Aquino to acquire and leave the intelligence, planning, control and command of the operation to Purisima as he was suspended at the time and had no legal authority over the entire PNP,” said Calida.

Purisima, on the other hand, exhibited, by his voluntary act without malice, an inexcusable lack of precaution when he reportedly instructed not to inform then interior secretary Manuel Roxas; he did not practice the “time on target,” and was remiss in providing intelligence inputs during the planning and execution of the operation.

Napeñas took orders from the suspended Purisima, which “orders and directive during Oplan Exodus did not produce any legal effect.”

Calida explained that while the mandate of his office is to represent the government, including the Office of the Ombudsman, it is also incumbent upon it to present to the SC “the position that will legally uphold the best interest of the government although it may run counter to a client’s position, the Ombudsman in this case.”

He added that they have informed the Ombudsman that the Solicitor General would not represent it and that the OSG “will act as People’s Tribune in this case.”