Suspension eyed for Sandigan justice linked to Napoles

MANILA, Philippines - Some justices of the Supreme Court (SC) want the recommended penalty of dismissal against Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Gregory Ong over links with alleged pork barrel fund anomaly brains Janet Lim-Napoles downgraded to mere suspension.

An insider bared yesterday that at least two members of the high court have disapproved the recommendation in the report submitted by retired SC Associate Justice Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez, who investigated the administrative charges against Ong for gross misconduct, dishonesty and impropriety.

The source, a member of the court, told The STAR that the two justices submitted their respective drafts rejecting the recommendation for dismissal of Ong from judicial service.

While the two magistrates agreed to uphold the finding of guilt of Ong in the charges, they believe that dismissal would be too harsh a penalty.

They want Ong to instead be suspended for three to six months. Their opinions have been distributed to the other justices before they decide on the case on July 8.

The source added that several justices support this position of their colleagues.

The names of the two justices are withheld due to the confidentiality rule on draft decisions of the high court. Either of the drafts of the two magistrates – if adopted by a majority of justices – could become the ruling of the court.

It was also learned that Associate Justices Diosdado Peralta and Teresita Leonardo-De Castro have inhibited in the administrative case since Ong was their colleague when they were still in the Sandiganbayan.

In her report, Gutierrez found after investigation that Ong committed “serious transgressions” when the fourth division of the anti-graft court that he chaired in 2010 acquitted Napoles of criminal charges emanating from questionable purchase of 500 Kevlar helmets by the Philippine Marines.

She told the high court in her 34-page report that Ong violated the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine judiciary and was guilty of gross misconduct, dishonesty and impropriety.

Gutierrez recommended that apart from dismissal, the high tribunal should also forfeit all his retirement benefits, excluding accrued leave credits, and prevent him from re-employment in any government office, including government-owned or controlled corporations.

The retired justice cited the testimonies of whistle-blowers Benhur Luy and Marina Sula as basis of her report. She also stressed that Ong failed to back up his denial with evidence.

The SC started the administrative probe against Ong last January as a result of the inquiry it initiated in October last year on sworn statements of Luy and Sula during the hearing of the Senate Blue Ribbon committee on the controversy on Sept. 26 last year.

The whistle-blowers at that time identified Ong as one of the personalities who visited Napoles’ office at the Discovery Suites in Ortigas and joined her parties.

Luy and Sula also identified the four lawyers among the associates of Napoles – Mark Oliveros, Editha Talaboc, Raymond Tansip and Joshua Lapuz.

The lawyers allegedly notarized documents of Napoles’ JLN Corporation for its projects funded by the Malampaya Fund, according to the witnesses.

They even reportedly left a dry seal in Napoles’ office, as well as specimen signatures, notary books and stamp pads for use by JLN employees.

The four lawyers were also covered by the SC probe.

In August, an online news website published a photo of Ong partying with Napoles and Sen. Jinggoy Estrada.

Ong has denied the charges. He claimed that the photo could not have been taken in 2010 or earlier. He said he and Estrada have been friends since 1994.

“Be that as it may, it is undisputed, however, that I was standing to the right of Senator Estrada to have my picture taken with him. I have no control whether other guests (in this case Mrs. Napoles, who was standing to his left) would also want to be photographed with us,” he said in the letter.

The justice also belied favoring Napoles, explaining that the Kevlar helmet case was dismissed by the members of the court division that acted as a collegial  body. – With Jess Diaz