Appeal to bubbleheads an exercise in futility

Section 14 of Republic Act 6770, or The Ombudsman Charter, states:

“No writ of injunction shall be issued by any court to delay an investigation being conducted by the Ombudsman under this Act, unless there is prima facie evidence that the subject matter of the investigation is outside the Office of the Ombudsman.

“No court shall hear any appeal or application for remedy against the decision or findings of the Ombudsman, except the Supreme Court, on pure question of law.”

If this law is still in effect, how come the Court of Appeals interfered in the job of the Office of the Ombudsman in investigating Makati Mayor Junjun Binay for corruption?

Suspending a government official or employee under investigation by the Ombudsman is part of the investigation process.

Based on the Ombudsman Charter, the appellate court has no business meddling in the investigation of the mayor, so its temporary restraining order (TRO) on his suspension is void.

* * *

The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), which screens appointees to the courts, is not doing a good job because many in our present batch of court judges and Court of Appeals (CA) justices are perceived to be corrupt or inept.

If the CA justices who issued the TRO on Mayor Binay’s suspension are not corrupt (my sources at the CA say they are not), then they must be inept because they don’t know The Ombudsman Charter.

No wonder the Court of Appeals is in such a mess. Its members are either corrupt or inept.

* * *

A few years ago, the appellate court affirmed the conviction of a quadriplegic (one whose arms and legs are paralyzed) who was sentenced to life in prison for rape despite my strong appeal on his behalf.

I took up the cudgels for the quadriplegic, who couldn’t even go to the toilet without being bodily carried by two people, because I knew that it was impossible for him to have committed the crime.

How could the paralytic have forced himself on a woman when he cannot even move by himself, I said.

But the Bulacan Regional Trial Court didn’t consider his physical condition and convicted him.

I thought the Court of Appeals justices who handled the quadriplegic’s plea of innocence were more intelligent than the judge.

I was wrong.

I even went to the appellate court to try to convince the justices who were hearing the appeal to go to the New Bilibid Prisons (NBP) and take a look at the physical condition of the appellant.

It was so frustrating appealing to people who apparently do not know any better.