Ombudsman seeks more time on poll automation case

The Office of the Ombudsman has asked the Supreme Court (SC) to give it more time to wrap up its investigation of the voided contract between the Commission on Elections (Comelec) and the private firm Mega Pacific eSolutions in the purchase of automated counting machines.

The High Tribunal had set a June 30 deadline for the Office of the Ombudsman to end its probe.

In a 10-page urgent manifestation, the Office of the Ombudsman said it had not wasted time in its investigation on the possible criminal liability of Comelec officials who might have been involved in the P1.2-billion contract.

The Office of the Ombudsman said the investigation into the voided contract began on Jan. 14, 2004 after then Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo ordered the Fact-Finding and Intelligence Research Office (now Field Investigation Office) to conduct an in-depth inquiry into the case.

The investigation has been "overtaken by significant events" following the resignation of Marcelo last November and the assumption of Merceditas Gutierrez as Ombudsman last Dec. 1, it added.

The Office of the Ombudsman, Gutierrez said in the exercise of her review powers, found "sufficient grounds for the conduct of further investigation necessary for the complete determination of the existence or non-existence of probable cause against all public officials."

Last May 3, the SC issued a resolution directing the Office of the Ombudsman "under pain of contempt" to report by June 30 its final determination on the liability of public and private individuals involved in the automated counting machine contract (ACM).

On Jan. 13, 2004, the SC voided the contract between the Comelec and Mega Pacific eSolutions for the purchase of the automated counting machines that were to have been used in the 2004 elections.

The Supreme Court directed the Office of the Ombudsman to determine the criminal liability of the Comelec commissioners, their subordinates and those from the private sector involved in the deal. It also directed the Office of the Solicitor General to recover the P1.2 billion spent for the purchase of the ACMs.

Earlier, the Office of the Ombudsman asked the High Tribunal to reconsider its order setting a June 30 deadline for the agency to end its investigation into the contract. However, the Supreme Court rejected the Office of the Ombudsman’s appeal for "lack of merit." — Mike Frialde, Jose Rodel