No politics in Tupas’ dismissal, says Ombudsman Santiago
Assistant Ombudsman Virginia Palanca-Santiago shows to reporters the Ombudsman decision finding Iloilo Governor Niel Tupas Sr. guilty for violation of the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act otherwise known as Republic Act 3019.“Nagkataon lang.”
This was the clarification made by Assistant Ombudsman Virginia Palanca-Santiago relative to the allegation of Governor Niel Tupas Sr. that the Ombudsman decision dismissing him from office was a form of “political oppression” perpetrated by his enemies.
“The Office of the Ombudsman is not into politics. The case was filed few years back, it just happened that the decision came out during this election season. If you have noticed our Field Investigation Office serves as the complainant, not any politician,” Santiago said.
Santiago further clarified that Tupas will stay in office despite the Ombudsman ruling dismissing him from the service in view of his reelection in 2007, but the Ombudsman will pursue a criminal case against him and the in-laws of his son at the Sandiganbayan.
Santiago handed mediamen copies of the Ombudsman decision and resolution dismissing Tupas after having been found guilty of violation of the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act otherwise known as Republic Act 3019.
The administrative and criminal cases docketed as OMB-C-A-09-0403-H and OMB-C-C-09-0403-H, respectively, stemmed from Tupas’s anomalous approval of the application of Melvin Requinto for an Industrial Sand and Gravel (ISAG) Permit in 2004 even though the latter has no technical capability, experience, and necessary equipment to operate.
The permit paved the way for the execution of the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between Requinto and M. Montesclaros Enterprises Inc. (MMEI), owned by the in-laws of the governor’s son Barotac Viejo Mayor Raul Tupas, allowing the latter to operate and maintain the rock crushing plant of Requinto and eventually securing the P63 million subcontract agreement with Taisei-Shimizu Joint Venture (TSJV) which was then constructing the New Iloilo Airport.
Serving as complainant in the case was the Ombudsman Field Investigation Office represented by Maria Olivia Elena A. Roxas.
Overall Deputy Ombudsman Orlando Casimiro ruled that Tupas committed the corrupt practice under Section 3, paragraph (e) of R.A. 3019 in conspiracy with Requinto and the officials of MMEI, namely, Mariano Montesclaros, Esther Montesclaros, Maita Montesclaros-Gue, Mariano Rico Montesclaros, and Totsy Montesclaros-Dueñas.
Section 3, paragraph (e) of R.A. 3019 refers to the causing of “any undue injury to any party including the Government or giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence.”
The Ombudsman ruling said “In sum, this Office is convinced that public respondent Governor Tupas, Sr., a public officer discharging administrative and official functions, conspired with private respondents by issuing the ISAG Permit to Requinto, whose business was not yet registered with the DTI at the time the permit was granted, knowing the latter lacked the technical capability, experience, and equipment to conduct the activities under the permit and would later transact business with MMEI, of which respondents Montesclaroses, the public respondent’s relatives by affinity, are incorporators, stockholders, and officers or directors.”
The Ombudsman also found probable cause against Tupas for committing the corrupt practice under Section 3, paragraph (j) of R.A. 3019 which reads: “Knowingly, approving or granting any license, permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any person not qualified for or not legally entitled to such license, permit, privilege, or advantage, or of a mere representative or dummy of one who is not so qualified or entitled.”
“Wherefore, premises considered, respondent Niel D. Tupas Sr. is hereby found GUILTY of Grave Misconduct, Dishonesty, and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service and is meted out the penalty of Dismissal from the Service. In view, however, of his reelection to office in 2007, the administrative penalty herein provided has become unenforceable,” reads the Ombudsman ruling on the case’s administrative aspect.
Meanwhile, Tupas in a press statement called as “unending political oppression” and “injustice” the latest Ombudsman decision against him.
“This is an act of desperation that is part of the last-ditch efforts of my opponents, aided by the oppressive administration of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, to permanently dispose of me as an obstacle to their evil plans to perpetrate a regime of injustice and oppression,” Tupas said.
“Once again, the Ombudsman has stitched together a fabric of lies and distortions to arrive at this most unjust and oppressive verdict,” Tupas said. “The Ombudsman has allowed itself to be used as a weapon against enemies of the Arroyo administration and its allies, namely Rep. Ferjenel Biron, Rep. Defensor and vice governor Rolex T. Suplico,” he added.
