CEBU, Philippines – Crisologo Saavedra has asked the Office of the Ombudsman Visayas to suspend Governor Gwendolyn Garcia for six months in relation to the controversial purchase of the Balili property in barangay Tinaan, Naga.
Saavedra, a self-styled whistleblower, has asked the Ombudsman to suspend the governor alleging that she can intimidate witnesses or even destroy evidence.
Capitol has branded this request of Saavedra as premature since the formal charges have not yet been filed.
Ombudsman Ma. Merciditas Gutierrez approved the final evaluation report of anti-graft prosecutor Roderick Blazo that criminal and administrative cases be filed against Garcia, Vice Governor Gregorio Sanchez, Provincial Board Members and others involved in the controversial purchase of the Balili property worth P98 million.
Saavedra said that the reason behind his request is that he fears the governor would intimidate witnesses or even destroy evidence that would affect the investigation.
He cited reports that have come out in the local newspapers where the governor stated that Capitol will continue to develop the Balili property.
The controversy stemmed after it was found that a huge portion of the property is underwater or a mangrove area.
He alleged that the reason why the governor wants to push through with the development could be to alter the physical appearance of the property, which is a vital piece of evidence in the case.
Capitol has an agreement with the Korean Power Company-Salcon Power Corp. for it to dump coal ash on the Balili property paying $1 for each metric ton that is dumped.
The power firm has paid an initial $500,000 and will pay the remainder of the initial $1 million deal once it starts dumping coal ash this January when operation starts.
Saavedra has also requested that the Office of the Ombudsman issue a cease and desist order to stop any further development of the property in question.
He explained that he only asked for Garcia's suspension as she is the chief executive of the province.
Premature
Lawyer Rory Jon Sepulveda, a Capitol consultant, said that the call for suspension is premature.
Sepulveda cited Administrative Order No. 7 series of 1990, which is also known as the Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman.
Under the rule on criminal investigation of cases, it states that if the complainant is not under oath or if the complaint is based only on official record or official report, the investigating officer shall require the complainant or supporting witnesses to execute affidavits to substantiate it.
He said that what the anti-graft office released was the final evaluation report recommending the upgrading of the anonymous complaint into a criminal and administrative investigation.
The rule further states that after such affidavit had been secured, the investigating officer shall issue an order attaching a copy of the affidavits and other supporting documents directing the respondents to submit within ten days from receipt before they get an order.
Earlier, Sepulveda appealed to the Office of the Ombudsman not to release resolutions to the media ahead of the persons involved in the complaint like what happened in the Balili issue.
Section 2 rule 5 of the same rules of procedure of the anti-graft office, Sepulveda cited that "when circumstances so warrant and with due prudence the Office of the Ombudsman may publicize in a fair and balance manner the filing of the complaint, grievance or request for assistance and the final resolution, decision or action taken thereon."
Provided however, that prior to such final action, no publicity shall be made of matters which may adversely affect national security or public interest, prejudice the safety of the witness or unduly exposed persons complained against to ridicule or public censure.
"That's a classic example of we are already been subjected to ridicule and public censure," Sepulveda said referring to how the media had reported the release of the evaluation report.
This is because such was only recommendatory. - /NLQ (FREEMAN)