Aquino seeks more time to reply
Former President Benigno S. Aquino III has asked the Office of the Ombudsman for one more month to respond to the technical malversation complaint filed against him over his role in the outlawed Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).
In a two-page motion filed on Sept. 13, lawyers of the Go and Umali law firm said that Aquino had only recently engaged their services in the case and they needed more time to study it. They asked the Ombudsman for an “additional period of thirty days” to confer with their client, but denied that this was meant to purposely delay the proceedings.
Aquino had received his copy of the Ombudsman’s order to submit his counter-affidavit on Sept. 8, giving him until Sept. 18 to rebut the allegations.
The Office of the Ombudsman had earlier given Aquino 10 days to comment on the complaint filed in July, stating that failure to file a counter-affidavit would be deemed a waiver of his right to submit controverting evidence.
The 26-page complaint for technical malversation, usurpation of legislative powers, and graft and corruption was filed on July 8, a week after Aquino completed his term on June 30 and lost his presidential immunity.
The complainants included Bayan Muna Rep. Carlos Zarate, Bagong Alyansang Makabayan secretary general Renato Reyes, Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption chair Dante Jimenez, social activist Mae Paner (Juana Change), and the heads of the Alliance of Concerned Teachers, Confederation for Unity, Recognition and Advancement of Government Employees, Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas, Gabriela, Kadamay and Philippine Heart Center Employees Association-Alliance of Health Workers.
Article continues after this advertisementAquino and his budget secretary Florencio Abad, were accused of diverting funds appropriated in the 2011, 2012 and 2013 budget laws to programs they themselves identified and approved.
The Department of Budget and Management launched the DAP in 2011 as a budget mechanism meant to accelerate spending and boost the economy. But the Supreme Court declared the practice unconstitutional in February 2015.
