Falsification plaints vs. fiscal dismissed

The Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas recently junked the complaints on falsification of public documents filed against a fiscal of the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor.

Jose Edwin Renegado, Prosecutor I of the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor-Cebu, was slapped with criminal and administrative complaints after he allegedly changed a resolution.

Dominga Arafol-Cataytay, in her complaints, said that, on March 16, she filed a complaint for Usurpation of Real Rights in Property at the Cebu Provincial Prosecutor's Office. The complaint was assigned to Renegado. On June 17, Cataytay said she received a copy of the resolution, dated February 11, dismissing her complaint. Cataytay questioned the resolution saying that Renegado could have altered it as seen on its date that appeared before the case was filed. She filed the case on March 16 but it was decided on February 11.

Renegado, however, admitted that there was error in printing the resolution but affirmed its content. He explained, in his counter-affidavit, that he failed to erase or change the date of the "previously stored resolution" in his computer. The date of the resolution of Cataytay's case was supposedly April 27. In a decision dated July 28, graft investigator Jane Aguilar stated that the "date does not affect either the veracity of the document or the effects thereof, such date not being essential."

Thus both complaints filed before the OMB-Visayas against the respondent were dismissed as the "putting of the wrong date is clearly an unintentional error satisfactorily explained by the respondent."

Aguilar explained that the OMB-Visayas can't touch on its merits as it is not empowered to review and pass upon resolutions issued by the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor. Thus Aguilar advised the complainant "other remedies are available under the law and she should avail of the same if she feels aggrieved by the decision." - Liv G. Campo