Desierto said he is considering filing at least three charges against lawyer Ernesto Francisco, who filed the impeachment complaint before the House committee on justice the other day.
"This kind of lawyer should be brought to the attention of the Supreme Court and should be disbarred. Among the grounds for disbarment are dishonesty and gross misconduct," Desierto said.
"He (has been) uttering falsehoods which resulted in undermining the credibility of officials in government. I think we will initiate disbarment proceedings against him," he added.
Aside from a disbarment complaint, Desierto said he may also file corruption and libel charges against Francisco for his alleged involvement in an attempt to bribe a public official.
"Certainly, he is just trying to destroy the name of the office not only of the employees but also of the head of this office, and that is libelous. It might be a charge," Desierto said.
Desierto dismissed Francisco as an "emotionally imbalanced" lawyer who has been charged with misconduct before the Supreme Court, but refused to elaborate.
In his impeachment complaint, Francisco claimed a bank he was representing gave the Ombudsman some P283,000 worth of video equipment and P500,000 in cash sometime in 1997.
Francisco was then representing the defunct Bank of Southeast Asia (BSA), now the local office of a Singaporean bank, which was implicated in a tax credit scam involving oil firm Petron Corp.
Government probers discovered that Petron checks, worth some P540 million and intended for the Bureau of Customs, were deposited in the BSA account of Skybound Realty Holdings, owned by Arnulfo Cabalsa.
Francisco claimed BSA gave the equipment and cash to Desierto so that he would defer the probe for two months "to let things die down and avert a bank run."
This is the second time an impeachment complaint was filed against the Ombudsman, following the 1996 charge that he allegedly solicited 10 expensive television sets at a discount of 20 percent for the 1995 Christmas party of the Office of the Ombudsman.
The House, however, did not pass the impeachment complaint.
In the latest impeachment complaint, Misamis Oriental Rep. Oscar Moreno, who endorsed Francisco’s complaint, urged Desierto to take a leave of absence while the complaint is pending in the House.
"He should go on leave for delicadeza (propriety’s sake). That way, he would also not be able to influence the proceedings," Moreno said.
Moreno, a member of the House panel that prosecuted former President Joseph Estrada in his Senate impeachment trial, said he wanted the complaints against Desierto investigated because he would not be able to effectively prosecute the cases against Estrada if there is a cloud of doubt over his head.
"There’s nothing personal about it," he said.
At the same time, he chided Sen. Manuel Villar, who was Speaker when Estrada was impeached, for saying the new complaint against Desierto would suffer the same fate as the first one.
Moreno said Villar opened his mouth too soon "because he will be sitting in judgment of the case against the Ombudsman if it reaches the Senate."
The former Speaker had earlier said Francisco’s complaint will not even reach the Senate since the impeachment process is so complex that many congressmen are not inclined to "waste their time on it."
House Minority Leader Carlos Padilla (LDP, Nueva Vizcaya) also urged the House leadership to give due course to the said complaint on the basis of its merit and not on friendship.
Meanwhile, three more senators gave the impeachment case against Desierto a cold shoulder treatment, saying they would rather attend to more important duties in the Senate.
Opposition Sen. Rodolfo Biazon noted that while the Senate would be ready for any impeachment proceeding, Desierto’s case would only be politicized because he was handling the cases against Estrada.
Senate Majority Leader Loren Legarda Leviste said that if the House passes articles of impeachment against Desierto, it would take up so much of the Senate’s time, which they would rather spend on legislative work.But if the House does approve the complaint, the Senate would have no choice but to hear the case, Legarda added.
Sen. Robert Barbers said he believes there is no reason for Desierto to take a leave of absence because it is still too early to determine whether the complaint has merit anyway.
Barbers averred that if the Ombudsman thinks he is innocent and that the evidence against him is weak, then Desierto’s duties should not be affected. - With reports from Jess Diaz, Aurea Calica