FILE PHOTO: Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. (Photo from his Facebook account)
MANILA, Philippines — Manila 6th District Rep. Bienvenido Abante vowed to move for the removal of the Office of the Ombudsman’s confidential funds (CF) if this would only cast doubt on the agency’s dignity, even if he sponsors and defends the proposed budget.
During the plenary debates on the General Appropriations Bill (GAB) on Wednesday, Abante reiterated the assurance of Ombudsman Samuel Martires — that the Office of the Ombudsman does not mind if Congress would remove the CF.
Abante said this after ACT Teachers Rep. France Castro and Gabriela party-list Rep. Arlene Brosas scrutinized the CF lodged in the Ombudsman’s proposed budget. According to Abante, he does not understand why discussions about the CF are so intense now when such funds have been given to the Ombudsman since 2005 — to support their investigatory mandate.
“Mr. Speaker, your Honor, I don’t know why this is a big issue — this is again, Mr. Speaker, my answer comes from my own opinion ah — I do not know why today, we talk about [CF] too much. I have been in Congress since 2004. We don’t talk about that before. It is only now that discussions about the [CF] are so heated,” Abante said in a mix of English and Filipino.
“I don’t know why, but the thing is this, what our Ombudsman said, if it will question the integrity of the Ombudsman, he said that we should remove the confidential fund, let Congress remove the confidential fund of the Ombudsman if it will only tarnish the integrity of the Ombudsman, Mr. Speaker, your Honor,” he added.
READ: OVP’s confidential fund sparks heated debate between Quimbo, Castro anew
After Castro pushed further, asking if the Office of the Ombudsman has complied with guidelines on the use of CF under Joint Circular 2015–01 of the Commission on Audit (COA) and the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), Abante quickly retorted that he had answered this question several times already — noting that the Ombudsman has complied with the requirements.
“Mr. Speaker, I think this was answered already, that the Ombudsman has complied with all the requirements of the COA. I have answered this,” Abante said.
“But as the Ombudsman said, so that there would be no doubts about the Ombudsman’s work, and for the sake of transparency and accountability, I would suggest the House to remove — I myself as the sponsor of this budget — I would suggest that the House remove the confidential fund of the Ombudsman,” he added.
When Castro asked if Abante was already making a motion to remove the CFs with the Ombudsman, the Manila lawmaker stressed that the current proceedings are not the correct way to propose an amendment — to which Deputy Speaker and Davao 3rd District Rep. Isidro Ungab agreed with.
“Nagmo-move ba kayo (Are you making a motion)? You are moving a motion to remove the confidential funds?” Castro asked.
“Mr. Speaker, point of order, I don’t think that it is proper that in this body right now, talking about the budget to make a motion,” Abante said.
“Is the sponsor asking for a ruling for a point of order? The point of order is that the proper period to propose such proposals is during the period of amendments, and there are other exact occasions for that so that you may proceed, your Honor,” Ungab replied.
Confidential funds needed
But another minority lawmaker in Abang Lingkod party-list Rep. Joseph Stephen Paduano called for the retention of the CFs, as it is an important part of the Office of the Ombudsman’s budget.
According to Paduano, while Martires’ assurance that they can work with the budget provided by the DBM and the Congress is praiseworthy, the CFs help the said Office fulfill its mandate — going after corruption and investigating government employees and officials.
“As our members pointed out in the budget briefing, it is rare for a government agency to be pleased with what the DBM has approved as their operating budget under the NEP (National Expenditures Program) for a given year,” Paduano said.
“Likewise, with the statement made by the sponsor to omit the confidential fund of the Office of the Ombudsman […] considering the vital role of the Office of the Ombudsman in our campaign against corruption it is only proper to increase to increase their budget, and if possible retain their original proposal in the amount of P6.72 billion,” he added.
Martires attracted controversy recently after he told the House committee on appropriations last September 11 that he has not submitted any receipt on the use of CFs, as it would defeat the purpose of keeping the fund’s purpose secret.
READ: House panel keeps P4.8-B confidential funds intact
According to Martires, it would be difficult for intelligence officers to liquidate expenses as it might show details of the case they are working on, or it might eventually be a tedious and repetitive practice. He also noted that the important thing to submit is a certification of how the funds were utilized. (with reports from Jezvette Kyelle Mapagdalita, INQUIRER.net trainee)