The refusal of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) to cooperate prompted the Office of the Ombudsman to terminate its investigation of President Duterte’s allegedly unexplained wealth.
Breaking its silence two days after Solicitor General Jose Calida made public the termination of the probe, the Ombudsman on Thursday said, however, that a “closed and terminated field investigation is without prejudice to the refiling of a complaint with new or additional evidence.”
Calida, on Tuesday, made public a letter dated Feb. 12 from Overall Deputy Ombudsman Arthur Carandang saying, that the termination of the probe on Sen. Antonio Trillanes’ plunder complaint against Mr. Duterte had been approved by Deputy Ombudsman Cyril Ramos on Nov. 29.
Evidence stage
The fact-finding, or field investigation, stage is when Ombudsman investigators gather evidence on a complaint of wrongdoing by a government official.
That the probe was terminated in the fact-finding stage, meant there was not enough evidence to pursue Trillanes’ complaint.
The Ombudsman, in a statement, said the probe hit a dead end “after the AMLC declined to provide a report or confirmation on the requested vital data.”
Carandang, last Sept. 26, admitted to the Inquirer the absence of a final AMLC report on Mr. Duterte’s bank accounts.
Much of the statement released by the Ombudsman on Thursday, was devoted to defending the office’s refusal to be transparent about the results of its fact-finding investigations.
Secrecy
Calida, on Tuesday, questioned why the Ombudsman failed to publicly disclose the probe’s termination. “Why withhold this information from the Filipino people?” Calida said.
The Ombudsman said it was “not obliged to inform the subject [Mr. Duterte] of the fact-finding investigation about its outcome.”
But the Ombudsman said Calida, by writing to Carandang on Feb. 8 to inquire about the status of the probe, effectively recognized that Malacañang’s Jan. 29 order to suspend Carandang was “unconstitutional.”