Ombudsman probes Noy, Abad for DAP; immunity raised

MANILA, Philippines - The Office of the Ombudsman is investigating President Aquino, Budget Secretary Florencio Abad and other officials in connection with the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).

“We have initiated a motu propio (on its own) investigation and the respondents include the President and Secretary Abad,” Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales told the House appropriations committee chaired by Davao City Rep. Isidro Ungab.

“There is already a fact-finding report that is currently under evaluation by the ombudsman. If we approve it, preliminary investigation follows. But we want to be sure of the law and the jurisprudence,” Morales said.

She also said she is evaluating another fact-finding report on a plunder case against Abad. “It should be resolved within the month,” she said.

Another report she is considering deals with the alleged misuse of P900 million in Malampaya funds. The officials accused in this case include former President now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and former Agrarian Reform secretary Nasser Pangandaman.

Immune from suit

Malacañang, however, maintained that the President is immune from suit.

“We wish to point out the constitutional principle that an incumbent President of the Philippines is immune from suit,” Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. of the Presidential Communications Operations Office said in a statement.

Coloma, however, acknowledged the power of the ombudsman to investigate.

“The Office of the Ombudsman is empowered by law to conduct such investigation as stated by Ombudsman Morales in reply to a question during a hearing on the proposed budget of her office in the House of Representatives,” he said.

 Process

Sought for comment, Abad said, “It’s the process of the ombudsman and we respect it. We will cooperate. We do want to put a closure to this issue.”

He said the Supreme Court has upheld in the DAP cases the “doctrine of operative fact, meaning that what we did was constitutional, legal and regular, and we implemented the economic stimulus program in good faith.”

“In fact, the Supreme Court declared that DAP benefited the country. We stand by our position that DAP was an urgent and appropriate response to the then under-spending problem that was slowing down the economy. The resulting uptick in spending and growth validated our position,” he said.

“We also commit to align, as we have already done, our savings, augmentation and realignment policies along with SC decision,” he added.

The budget chief noted that “there was no insinuation of graft” in the tribunal’s ruling, adding the ombudsman has not yet sought any comment from them.

“This is just the fact-finding stage. If they go to preliminary investigation, that’s when they will require us to comment,” Abad, who is a lawyer, said.

The Supreme Court (SC) stopped the administration’s economic stimulus program in 2014 after declaring at least four practices under it as unconstitutional.– With Delon Porcalla