Ombudsman orders dismissal of Albay governor
The Office of the Ombudsman has ordered the dismissal of suspended Albay Gov. Grex Lagman for the alleged protection money he received, purportedly from jueteng operators. File photo/Philippine Daily Inquirer / NIÑO JESUS ORBETA
MANILA, Philippines — The Office of the Ombudsman has ordered the dismissal of suspended Albay Gov. Grex Lagman for the alleged protection money he received, purportedly from jueteng operators.
In an order dated January 28, 2025, released to the media on Tuesday, the Ombudsman found Lagman “guilty of grave misconduct,” which merited “dismissal from the service and all its accessory penalties.”
READ: Ex-Albay gov withdraws from gubernatorial race; endorses Rosal for 2025
In October 2024, Lagman himself announced that the Ombudsman had placed him under preventive suspension.
The case against the dismissed governor stemmed from a complaint filed by Alwin Nimo, a former barangay chairman of Anislag in Daraga, last February 13 of the same year.
In his complaint, Nimo also accused Lagman of dishonesty and neglect of duty and presented an alleged receipt by the latter of P8.1 million from August 19 to June 2022. Nimo claimed the money reportedly served as “payola” or protection money from jueteng operations.
“Complainant argues that respondent, while being the vice governor and presiding officer of Sangguniang Panlalawigan, did not do anything to put an end to illegal gambling in Albay,” the document reads.
“This, he did, in fulfillment of his promise to provide protection to illegal gambling operations in exchange for the weekly payola he received,” it added.
Based on the Ombudsman’s order, Lagman said in his counter-affidavit in 2024 that “the present complaint was just a vilification campaign against him by his rivals in the upcoming elections.”
He also claimed that the “deposit slips” presented by the complainant “are questionable.”
Although Lagman was found guilty of grave misconduct, the Ombudsman dismissed the dishonesty and neglect of duty charges against him for “insufficiency of evidence.”
