SC dismisses Sandigan justice

MANILA, Philippines – The Supreme Court ordered yesterday the dismissal of Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Gregory Ong over links with alleged pork barrel scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles, whose lavish parties he attended and from whom he reportedly collected money after the dismissal of a case against her.

Voting 8-5 with two abstentions, the high court found Ong guilty of gross misconduct, dishonesty and impropriety, upholding key recommendations of retired SC Associate Justice Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez, who led a fact-finding investigation into allegations against the dismissed magistrate.

Ong is the first justice of the Sandiganbayan, which handles cases against corrupt and erring government officials, to be dismissed.

The decision, which takes effect immediately, also includes forfeiture of Ong’s retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, as well as perpetual disqualification from reemployment in government service.

The administrative case against Ong stemmed from the dismissal of the case for malversation through falsification of public documents against Napoles in connection with her anomalous sale in 1998 of 500 Kevlar helmets to the Philippine Marines.

Ong was then member of the Sandiganbayan’s Fourth Division, which dismissed the case.

The SC cited findings that Ong met with Napoles twice at her office after the anti-graft court Fourth Division acquitted her in the case.

“By his act of going to (Napoles) at her office on two occasions, (Ong) exposed himself to the suspicion that he was partial to Napoles,” the high tribunal ruled, adding that the “totality of the circumstances of such association strongly indicates (Ong’s) corrupt inclinations that only heightened the public’s perception of anomaly in the decision-making process.”

The SC noted that Ong was “no longer fit to remain as a magistrate of the special graft court” because he has had a record of breaching rules and ethics.

The dismissed magistrate was fined P15,000 in 2010 for violating the Revised Internal Rules of the Sandiganbayan.

As chairman of the Sandiganbayan Fourth Division, he allowed the holding of separate hearings in Davao City – one presided over by him and the other by his two colleagues – in violation of rules.

Credible witnesses

The SC also gave weight to the testimonies of pork barrel scam whistle-blowers Benhur Luy and Marina Sula that Ong was in contact with Napoles while the Kevlar case was still being heard.

It pointed out that while bribery and corruption charges were not proven since both Luy and Sula did not witness Ong actually receiving money from Napoles, there was credible evidence of Ong’s association with Napoles after the latter’s acquittal.

The high court said that such act was grossly improper and violated Section 1, Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct.

In her fact-finding report, Gutierrez stressed that Ong did not even mention to Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno his visit to Napoles, when the chief magistrate sought explanation for allegations that he had attended parties hosted by the alleged pork barrel scam mastermind.

The SC, citing Gutierrez’s findings, said Luy and Sula “testified in a candid, straightforward and categorical manner. Their testimonies were instantaneous, clear, unequivocal and carried with it the ring of truth.”

Gutierrez said the statements the two gave her were consistent with the ones they made before the Senate Blue Ribbon committee. She said Luy and Sula were “credible, honest, trustworthy and untainted with bias.”

No simple misconduct

The high court also stressed that Ong’s misconduct could not be considered “simple” because his association with Napoles had “dragged the judiciary into the ‘pork barrel’ controversy, which initially involved only legislative and executive officials.”

The SC rejected the defense of the magistrate that his meetings with Napoles took place after her acquittal.

“It does not matter that the case is no longer pending when improper acts were committed by the judge. Because magistrates are under constant public scrutiny, the termination of a case will not deter public criticisms for acts which may cause suspicion on its disposition or resolution,” it explained.

The high court also found Ong guilty of dishonesty under Canon 3 (Integrity) of the New Code of Judicial Conduct due to his untruthful statements on crucial matters even before the administrative complaint was filed against him.

In full court session yesterday, a majority of eight justices of the high court voted to approve the decision they jointly wrote. They were Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio and Associate Justices Arturo Brion, Mariano del Castillo, Martin Villarama Jr., Estela Perlas-Bernabe, Marvic Leonen and Francis Jardeleza.

Five other members of the high court dissented: Associate Justices Presbitero Velasco Jr., Lucas Bersamin, Jose Perez, Jose Mendoza and Bienvenido Reyes.

Associate Justices Teresita Leonardo-de Castro and Diosdado Peralta abstained since they were both colleagues of Ong in the Sandiganbayan prior to their appointment to the SC.

The minority believed that dismissal was too harsh a penalty. They wanted Ong suspended instead for six or three months.

SC spokesman Theodore Te told reporters Ong could still file an appeal.

“Motion for reconsideration is always available, but judgment is carried out pending MR (motion for reconsideration),” Te explained.

The SC official also denied a report of ABS-CBN that Ong had filed for early retirement prior to the SC decision.

Ruling praised

Justice Secretary Leila de Lima lauded the SC ruling, saying it “affirmed that moral integrity is not divisible.”

“Moral integrity is the highest qualification for judges and justices. Members of the judiciary found lacking in integrity cannot be merely suspended because the character disqualification is permanent, not only incidental,” she said in a text message.

“The trust of the people in the justice system is best preserved by maintaining the highest levels of moral integrity in the superior courts,” she added.

The SC started the administrative procedure against Ong in January as follow up to an inquiry it initiated in October last year into allegations – in sworn statements – by Luy and Sula that they had seen the magistrate visit Napoles in her office at the Discovery Suites in Ortigas Center, Pasig City. They also claimed seeing Ong at parties hosted by Napoles.

Luy and Sula made the revelations before the Senate Blue Ribbon committee during a hearing on the pork barrel issue on Sept. 26 last year.

In August last year, an online news website published a photo of Ong partying with Napoles and Sen. Jinggoy Estrada, who is under detention for plunder.

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

The dismissed justice also denied favoring Napoles, saying the Fourth Division acted as a collegial body when its members dismissed the Kevlar helmet case against the businesswoman.

The first major controversy to hound Ong was the withdrawal of his appointment as SC justice during the previous Arroyo administration on accusations that he was a Chinese citizen. The high court eventually affirmed his Filipino citizenship.