Cebu Gov. Garcia files complaint vs Ombudsman for suspending her

Cebu Gov. Gwendolyn Garcia has filed a complaint against Ombudsman Samuel Martires before the Commission on Elections (Comelec), alleging that he committed an election offense after he issued a six-month preventive suspension order against her last month.  —Photo from Gov. Gwen Garcia FB page

MANILA, Philippines —  Cebu Gov. Gwendolyn Garcia has filed a complaint against Ombudsman Samuel Martires before the Commission on Elections (Comelec), alleging that he committed an election offense after he issued a six-month preventive suspension order against her last month.

Martires had stated that the suspension order against the Cebu governor was to pave the way for an investigation into the permit Garcia reportedly granted to a construction firm without environmental clearance.

But the suspended governor argued that the order released by Martires violates Section 261(x) of Batas Pambansa Blg. 881, also known as the Omnibus Election Code.

Under this provision, she pointed out that public officials are barred from suspending an elective provincial, city, municipal, or barangay officer during the election period without prior Comelec approval.

READ: Cebu Gov. Garcia defies suspension; Ombudsman says it’s no surprise

The election period occurs 60 days before and 30 days after the polls.

“This includes April 29—the day the suspension order was served to Garcia’s office, just 13 days before the May 12 midterm elections. No prior clearance from Comelec was sought,” her statement reads.

She added that the charges against her are “purely administrative” and “not criminal in nature, and not based on violations of Republic Act (RA) No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.”

“Respondent violated the law. The suspension was served without Comelec’s clearance and outside the only exception the law provides. There is no justification,” Garcia said in a statement quoting her 10-page complaint.

Timing of the suspension order raises serious concern

According to Garcia, the order was signed by the Ombudsman on April 24, which is also the date a cease-and-desist order (CDO) issued by Garcia was set to expire.

Garcia argued that the CDO she issued “temporarily halted a large-scale quarrying operation linked to a major cement plant, which local officials feared was endangering lives and communities.”

“To many, the sequence of events suggests political retribution: a Governor moving to regulate powerful interests is suddenly removed from office through an expedited suspension order, timed to fall within the final stretch of a high-stakes election,” Garcia claimed.

READ: DILG awaiting Comelec clarification on Cebu Gov. Garcia’s suspension order

The suspended governor said the initial complaint against her came from Moises Garcia Deiparine, whom she said “objected to her issuance of a special permit for desilting works along the Mananga River.”

She claimed that the permit was issued when Metro Cebu experienced a water crisis caused by a prolonged drought from 2023 to last year.

“And yet, instead of being commended for taking swift and decisive action to prevent a disaster affecting eight cities and municipalities, I was, to my great shock and dismay, unjustly slapped with a preventive suspension order,” Garcia said in her complaint.

Citing the statements of Martires that the order was served directly to her office, Garcia claimed that the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) was bypassed “to prevent her from obtaining injunctive relief from the courts.

“With these statements, it is clear the respondent is determined to remove me as Governor of Cebu at all costs,” she added.

Moreover, Garcia maintained that she will not step down and that the DILG supports her stand on this.

Earlier, DILG Undersecretary for Public Affairs and Communications Rolando Puno said they are still awaiting clarification from the Comelec about the suspension order on Garcia.

On May 1, Martires asserted that the suspension order is “valid” and that “this is not the first time” Garcia “defied the rule of law,” particularly the one issued by the Ombudsman.

Citing a decision dated January 15, 2018, Martires disclosed that then-Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales ordered Garcia—who at that time was a member of Congress—to be dismissed from service “with the accessory penalties of perpetual disqualification from holding public office, cancellation of eligibility, and forfeiture of retirement benefits.”

However, Martires said Garcia remained in the office until June 2019.

He likewise assured Garcia that due process was observed in the issuance of the order, based on the requirements of Section 24 of the Republic Act 6770 or the Ombudsman Act of 1989, which states: “The Ombudsman or the Deputies can preventively suspend an officer or employee under their authority pending an investigation. This can be done if the evidence of guilt is strong and the charges involve dishonesty, oppression, gross misconduct, or neglect of duty, or if the respondent’s continued stay in office might prejudice the case.”

“The suspension, without any pay, can last until the case is terminated by the Office of the Ombudsman, but not exceeding six months.”/coa