MANILA, Philippines – (UPDATE 2) The House of Representatives’ committee on justice has junked the impeachment complaint against Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.
Cheers erupted from employees and officers of the Office of the Ombudsman who attended the proceedings as the chairman of the panel, Quezon City Representative Matias Defensor, announced that an “absolute majority” had found the complaint insufficient in substance.
Defensor did not anymore count the vote of the pro-impeachment lawmakers and left the room after announcing that the complaint was dismissed for insufficiency in substance, prompting minority lawmakers to protest.
“You did not even have the decency to count our votes,” shouted Akbayan party list Representative Walden Bello.
Representative Teodoro Casiño of Bayan Muna partylist raised suspicion that “they wanted it done and over with” while the public’s attention was focused on the flood victims in Metro Manila.
Gutierrez had been charged with betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution in the complaint filed in March by former Cabinet officials and leaders of civil society groups led by former Senate President Jovito Salonga.
The voting came immediately after eight anti-impeachment lawmakers presented their position before the panel defending Gutierrez, in response to a presentation made by endorsers of the complaint during a previous hearing.
Representative Neri Colmenares of Bayan Muna partylist requested for a copy of the presentation and asked for time to debate the anti-impeachment lawmakers who have raised “novel theories” in defending Gutierrez.
But Oriental Mindoro Representative Amelita Villarosa made a motion vote on the sufficiency of substance. Questions raised by the minority lawmakers were ignored and the panel, packed mostly by administration allies, went on with the voting.
Interviewed after the proceeding, Defensor said he ruled that there was absolute majority vote because only 28 votes were needed to decide on the case. He said a total of 38 members voted to dismiss the complaint.
“You only need 28 votes, there are 38 who voted, so it’s carried. . . . It’s gonna be beyond question,” he said.
“And we don’t want anymore to dramatize all these things because I think we have to put an end to this, this has dragged long enough, the House has many things to do,” Defensor added.
Defensor said the dismissal of the case for insufficiency in substance “was the not the end of the impeachment complaint.”
“This is just the committee report, subject to presentation to the plenary,” he said.
Pro-impeachment lawmakers can still keep the complaint alive and send it to the Senate for trial if they get the signatures of at least one-thirds or the 268-member chamber, or 90 members.
Assistant Ombudsman Mark Jalandoni said Gutierrez was “relieved this impeachment case has been dismissed.”
“Ombudsman Gutierrez has consistently stated that she was confident that these charges will be dismissed because it has no leg to stand on so today is the affirmation of her expectations so now we move forward and go back to the daily duties in the office,” he told reporters in an interview.
Asked if they were sent by Gutierrez to the House, Jalandoni said, “No, together with the rest of the Ombudsman employees and officers, we filed our respective leaves to be able to be present today to watch the proceedings.”
Asked if they expected the voting Tuesday, he said, “We wanted to be part of the proceedings, to witness the proceedings and see it for ourselves.”
Anti-impeachment lawmakers who defended Gutierrez were Representative Exequiel Javier of Antique, Antonio Cerilles of Zamboanga del Sur, Pablo John Garcia of Cebu, Vigor Mendoza of 1-UTAK party list, Raul Gonzales Jr. of Iloilo, Jonathan Mendoza of Abakan partylist, Giorgidi Aggabao of Isabela and Mauricio Domogan of Baguio City.
Grounds cited against Gutierrez for betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution included:
• Deliberately ignoring the Supreme Court’s findings, which voided the P1.3-billion supply deal of Mega Pacific with the Commission on Elections under Chair Benjamin Abalos.
• “Deliberate and inordinate” inaction on collusion and corruption involved in the World Bank bidding of road projects.
• Filing late and defective information that undermined the cases against former Justice Secretary Hernando Perez who has been charged with extorting money from former Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez.
• “Gross inexcusable inaction” on the P1-billion fertilizer fund scam cases filed by the Senate, lawyer Frank Chavez and murdered journalist Marlene Esperat.
• Failing to promptly resolve the “Euro generals” dollar smuggling case despite overwhelming evidence and admission by the PNP comptroller, Director Eliseo de la Paz.
• Committing grave abuse in dismissing and suspending local government officials, specifically Iloilo Governor Neil Tupas and Bataan Governor Enrique Garcia.
Mendoza, who discussed the fertilizer fund scam, refuted allegations in the complaint that Gutierrez could be charged with betrayal of public trust because the issue remained unacted for almost three years.
“The fact that it’s delayed does not make it capricious, vexatious, oppressive. . . .Mere mathematical reckoning of time is not sufficient,” Mendoza said.
Domogan said that the “Constitution requires that betrayal must be characterized by grossness, oppressiveness, inexcusableness and tastelessness to warrant the removal of the office holder.”
