Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez and the real score behind a controversial impeachment

Seventy three percent conviction rate. 

Embattled Ombudsman
Merceditas Gutierrez

That's the conviction rate of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, according to the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. Gutierrez record stands even better than Marcelo's, Desierto's and Vazquez's performance. 


Despite this, a lynch mob of self-righteous self-gooders think that they know better or knows someone better than Gutierrez, who, during her time, convicted and placed behind bars, a former president once accused of plunder. 


Merceditas Gutierrez is simply a case of bad P.R. 


For one, her office failed to explain to the public how messy the judicial system is and that the Ombudsman is simply an investigative and prosecutory agency, not the final arbiter of cases.


Had the public been educated on the judicial process, this would not have happened. People would probably even praise her for the immediate conviction of several government officials, once considered as very influential politicians in their areas.


Likewise, Gutierrez's name was identified as someone very close to a corrupt regime, and therefore, presumed to be as corrupt as her principals. Having the former First Gentleman as a classmate is now considered as lethal as a snake bite. 


Gutierrez is widely and highly respected by her peers. I know that personally. I once visited the Office of the Ombudsman and saw for myself, how devoted the staff and employees of that government agency are to her. 


If Gutierrez is indeed corrupt, then, why the hell are these people here, supporting, even rooting for her retention?


Of course, there were several controversial cases which smack of bad judgements or missteps, like this plea bargaining agreement with former Major General Carlos Garcia. Garcia's case is most likely the worse proof of mishandling a clear case of plunder. But, trying her for this is simply not right. Or, trying her for having this association with a former corrupt husband of a corrupt leader is also, not exactly right.


The core of the impeachment complaint was her alleged conviction rate. If that is the case, then, all pieces of evidence would actually show that the Ombudsman performed her job in quite a sterling manner since she has a very high conviction rate. 


If the complaint stemmed from her alleged "inaction" on cases involving her powerful principals, then, there should be concrete pieces of evidence showing those alleged inactions. As this stands, it is simply a substantive matter. Meaning, it would be extremely hard to prove this allegation because a case is dismissed or not based on legal evidence, not on very substantive grounds as "sitting on a case". In law, there are subscription periods. If these periods indeed show an inaction, then, the person who sits as Ombudsman is not the person to be prosecuted, but the one who handles the case. That is the law. If the accuser says that it is a principle of command responsibility, then, this is pushing the issue too thinly.

Heidi Mendoza---a Patriot

Let there be no doubt---the Filipino People will protect honest government people like Heidi Mendoza, the fearless auditor who now is exposing the anomalies at the Armed Forces of the Philippines. Mendoza has called upon the Filipino People to protect her and her family from harm. And the Filipino People will respond accordingly. 


I call upon all Patriotic elements to rally behind this petite lady as she takes the cudgels for honest men and truth seekers everywhere. 


Various groups, including ecumenicals, have rallied behind Mendoza as she exposes how millions of pesos went poofed during her probe into the Garcia case. It seems that there were numerous pieces of evidence against Garcia that the Office of the Ombudsman failed to consider when they were investigating the case.


A re-investigation, and possibly a deeper one, is in order. Ombudman Merceditas Gutierrez should, in the interest of honesty and fair play, re-investigate this matter and file an appropriate case. There should be no doubt about it. Mendoza and ex Lt. Col. Rabusa's revelations are new pieces of evidence that could really be used to pin down Garcia and his cohorts.


Likewise, the State should not proceed with the plea bargaining agreement with Garcia given these new revelations.


The only question now is---how deep will these revelations affect the institution, that is, the Armed Forces of the Philippines? Will it initiate a reform movement within the organization?

Millennium Challenge Fund is work done by Ombudsman--says ex Budget Secretary Andaya

Former budget secretary and now Congressman Rolando Andaya told the Committee on Finance at the Lower House yesterday that the Millennium Challenge fund, which was recently secured by the Aquino administration, was actually the product of years of hard work by the Arroyo administration, most especially, the Office of the Ombudsman.

The Office of the Ombudsman led by Merceditas Gutierrez contributed greatly to process the grant which requires a lot of things. One of them, an excellent performance from the anti-graft agency of government. 

IN 2008-2009, the Office of the Ombudsman worked hard to get a 56% prosecution rating, 16% higher than the 40% requirement of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the US agency tasked to process the funds grant. It was under the leadership of Assistant Ombudsman Mark Jalandoni of the Ombudsman Field Investigation Unit, that the Office of the Ombudsman made the highly successful prosecution rate. 

The US$434 Million grant is a 5-year compact between the MCC and the GRP. It intends to help the government reduce poverty. The funds will be used to support reforms and investments to modernized the BIR, expand and improve a community-driven development project, Kalahi-CIDSS and rehabilitate a secondary national road in Samar province.

There were 17 indicators that were put forth and one of them pertains to the anti-graft and corrupt record of the applicant-country. Unknown to many, the Ombudsman is the only constitutional body tasked with investigating cases of graft and corruption. It acts as a prosecuting body, much like the prosecutors of the Department of Justice. 

However, the Ombudsman can only investigate and file charges against government and/or private individuals involved in nefarious acts. It does not have the power to try them because it is another constitutional body, the Sandiganbayan, which has the mandate to act as a court. 

Let us laud the Office of the Ombudsman for doing such a fine job in the anti-corrupt and graft practices campaign of the government. 

Yesterday, however, I learned that the Aquino administration has significantly reduced the budget allotted for the Ombudsman. Why?

I still remember the inaugural speech of President Noynoy Aquino which essentially lay down a platform against graft and corruption. If this administration will reduce the budget of the Ombudsman, it likewise reduces its capability of going after the big-time thieves and corrupt men of our government. 

Congressman Rufus Rodriguez supports the budget proposal of the Ombudsman and even suggested that it be increased. Rodriguez, a former BID commissioner, knows exactly how important the budget is, especially to a constitutional body such as the Ombudsman. Governmental agencies need a big budget to fund its various campaigns, especially in going after these people who raid the public coffers and line their pockets with the people's money.

To hell with the impending impeachment proceedings against Merceditas Gutierrez. The people are not interested in politics. What the people want is justice. And how will the Ombudsman, as a Constitutional institution, honestly work for the full implementation of its mandate if this government tries to defang it to the detriment of the People?

This government must set aside politics and consider one thing--the implementation of its core agenda which is the fight against graft and corruption in governance.