Supreme Court: Ombudsman can probe officials before COA issues findings

The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that the Office of the Ombudsman does not need to wait for the Commission on Audit (COA) to issue findings before probing public officials.

In a statement on Tuesday, the SC said that the Ombudsman could investigate possible wrongdoings on its own without waiting on the COA.

“The Office of the Ombudsman is not required to wait for the finality of any audit or investigation by the COA before it can investigate unlawful and improper acts of public officials on its own,” the SC ruled.

In a decision penned by Associate Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh, the SC ruled that Ronelo Del Socorro and other officials from the Provincial Government of Palawan were liable for irregularities in the local government’s cut of the Malampaya Funds.

The case revolved around the P2.57 billion Malampaya Fund that was released for various development projects in Palawan. From this amount, P966 million was allocated to fund electrification, healthcare, education and more.

However, a COA special audit report flagged several irregularities, prompting the Office of the Ombudsman to file four administrative complaints against the provincial officials.

The complaints accused the officials of inadequate publication and posting of bids, improper evaluation of bidder’s eligibility, and awarding of contracts despite incomplete requirements. The same personnel were also allegedly assigned to multiple projects with overlapping schedules.

The Ombudsman had found the officials liable for grave misconduct, serious dishonesty, and gross neglect of duty. The ruling was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

The Palawan officials challenged the ruling, saying that the Ombudsman's investigation was based on COA findings that were not final yet. The COA also ordered a later review on some of the projects flagged.

The SC held that the provincial officials were administratively liable.

The 1987 Constitution empowers the Ombudsman to investigate possibly erring officials on its own initiative or upon a complaint.

The Ombudsman and the COA have separate and independent powers, the SC said. COA audits government funds and transactions while the Ombudsman investigates possible wrongdoings.

According to the SC, the Ombudsman did not solely rely on the COA findings. It independently reviewed supporting documents, bidding records, contracts and more.

The officials in question were dismissed from service and perpetually disqualified from holding public office, with their retirement benefits forfeited, the SC said. — RSJ, GMA News