Ombud restricts info access on cases
SEEKING updates of cases filed with the Ombudsman became more restrictive thanks to a memorandum issued this month.
In a memorandum dated last Jan. 5, Tanodbayan Conchita Carpio-Morales said only parties to a case, their lawyers and their authorized representatives can ask for updates on their cases by filling up the prescribed verification slips.
The verification slip contains information to be filed by the applicant such as the date when the request was made, name and signature of the requester, address, contact number, case number, title of the case and remarks.
Morales said her recent mandate is intended “to ensure the effective implementation of the citizen’s charter of the Office of the Ombudsman and at the same time properly observe confidentiality of proceedings.”
Asst. Ombudsman Virginia Palanca-Santiago said the rule applies to fact-finding cases and preliminary investigation done by the Ombudsman-Visayas.
She gave Cebu Daily News a copy of the memorandum they received last Jan. 13.
When one is representing a party, he or she shall present an ID and an authorization letter.
The Ombudsman said the status is limited only to information on cases “under evaluation, preliminary investigation/administrative adjudiciation, review, referred for mediation, referred to sectoral offices and the date they were resolved.”
“Other concerns, comments, or suggestions should be made in writing addressed to the honorable Ombudsman (Morales),” the anti-graft office said.
Santiago said the memorandum also applied to media wanting to ask updates of cases.
“Any individual not party to a case should make a formal letter stating the purpose of the request, which shall be subject to the approval of the Ombudsman or the Deputy Ombudsman,” the memorandum read.
Morales said only authorized records officers and personnel-in-charge shall attend to requests for case status and issue the verification requested.
She said accomplished verification slip should be released to the requesting party and copy furnish the office handling the case, and the Records Division/Section concerned.
Businessman Crisologo Saavedra, who filed a number of complaints before the Ombudsman, has no objections with the directive saying it is an improvement in the system.
Saavedra said the letter-requests will be used as evidence for filing of complaints in case the anti-graft office won’t release status of cases immediately.
Saavedra filed complaints on the alleged anomalous purchase of the lampposts installed in Metro Cebu for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Summit in January 2007.
He also filed cases on the Capitol’s 2009 purchase of the Balili property in Cebu and the 2007 construction of the Cebu International Convention Center (CICC).
The cases concerning the lampposts are pending before the Sandiganbayan while the other cases are still under preliminary investigation before the Ombudsman Manila.
Cebu Gov. Gwendolyn Garcia is named respondent in both cases.
The CICC case was endorsed to Manila in 2009 while the Balili case was submitted to the anti-graft’s central office last year.
Morales’ predecessor Merceditas Gutierrez earlier required their offices in the country to forward cases involving governors and vice governors to their central office.
Saavedra said he is dismayed because the anti-graft office hasn’t released the results of the cases until now.
He said the Balili case is now with Tanodbayan Morales based on the reports he received from sources.
“It has been awhile since the cases (were referred to Manila). I’m just surprised. There must be something wrong. I hope the Garcias are not influencing the Ombudsman,” Saavedra said.
He said he will ask the Ombudsman to give him a status of the cases. Reporter Ador Vincent Mayol
