LWUA chief Pichay fails to get TRO to stop suspension | Inquirer News

LWUA chief Pichay fails to get TRO to stop suspension

By: - Reporter / @T2TupasINQ
/ 01:04 PM May 31, 2011

MANILA, Philippines—Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) Chairman Prospero Pichay failed to get a temporary restraining order from the Court of Appeals to stop the implementation of the six months preventive suspension imposed against him by the Office of the Ombudsman.

“A punctilious review of available records in the instant case reveals that petitioner has so far failed to show a clear and unmistakable right which would justify the issuance of an injunctive writ,” the appeals court 3rd division said in a resolution penned by Associate Justice Estela Perlas-Bernabe.

“Neither has he sufficiently established any urgent and imperative necessity for the grant of the said writ as would prevent serious damage,” the appeals court added.

ADVERTISEMENT

“An order of preventive suspension is merely a preliminary step in an administrative investigation, usually made immediately effective and executory to prevent the respondent from using his/her position or office to influence prospective witnesses or tamper with the records which may be vital to the prosecution of the case.”

FEATURED STORIES

The appeals court issued the resolution without acting on Pichay’s other appeal which is to reverse the suspension meted against him by the Office of the Ombudsman.

The appeals court noted that Pichay also failed to attach certain documents in his petition and he was given five days to correct the deficiencies by submitting the following documents—the consolidated criminal and administrative complaint filed by LWUA employees, Pichay’s counter-affidavit and the position papers submitted by the parties—or his petition will be dismissed.

In his petition for certiorari, Pichay said the acting Ombudsman Orlando Casimiro committed grave abuse of discretion when he approved the suspension imposed against him.

Pichay said Casimiro approved the recommendation when former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez twice denied the recommendation to suspend him.

Pichay has been preventively suspended by the Office of the Ombudsman to make sure that he will not be able to interfere with the investigation in connection with a case of grave misconduct filed against him.

The Office of the Ombudsman explained that the suspension was necessary to make sure that Pichay will not be able to jeopardize the investigation being conducted against him to determine if he is guilty or not of grave misconduct and violation of Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officers and Employees.

ADVERTISEMENT

LWUA employees Rustico Tutol, Luis Estrada, and Carmen Amores filed the complaint against Pichay over the questionable purchase of 60 percent outstanding capital stock of the Express Savings Bank, Inc. (ESBI).

Complainants said LWUA paid P80 million for the 60 percent shares of ESBI, whose main office is located in Cabuyao, Laguna.

The bank was undergoing rehabilitation from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas at the time of LWUA’s purchase. The employees added that through LWUA Board Resolution No. 336, the government agency invested another P400 million to increase the bank’s authorized capital.

Complainants said that Pichay ignored Administrative Order No. 59 which requires that all proposals to establish subsidiary corporations shall be submitted to the Monetary Board for review and have to be approved by the Office of the President.

They added that Section 15 of the General Appropriations Act for 2009 which restricts the use of government funds as investments or deposit in private banking institutions was also violated.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

The Ombudsman’s investigation will determine if Pichay is administratively guilty which would warrant dismissal from service.

TAGS: Court of Appeals, Government

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.