Ombudsman post: Silvestre Bello may still qualify if…

MANILA, Philippines — The pending complaints against Labor Secretary Silvestre Bello III at the Office of the Ombudsman may only lessen his chances of being appointed as the next ombudsman but won’t totally disqualify him from the race, members of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) said yesterday.

“Secretary Bello is still in the race, but with less priority if reports about his pending complaints are true,” Oriental Mindoro Rep. Rey Umali, a member of the seven-man JBC, said. 

Another JBC member, Justice Secretary Menardo Guevarra, said that although the council entertained Bello’s application, he could be disqualified only if the complaints against him are not resolved by the ombudsman by the time the council deliberates on his application.

Bello believes the distinction is between a complaint and an actual case, which means a contender runs the risk of disqualification from the post if he has criminal cases pending in courts. 

“I believe the rules talk about cases and not complaints,” Bello said, referring to Section 5 of Rule 4 of the JBC rules which provide that those with pending cases are disqualified from nomination or appointment to the post.

Umali, chairman of the House committee on justice, explained that Bello’s application might only be placed in the less priority list as the selection process is categorized under first, second and third priority.

Under these categories, Umali said applicants are assessed and ranked based on the pending complaints and cases, issue of competence and disqualification case, among other things.

“The chances of applicants are affected by the appreciation of the JBC members of these issues. We have first, second and third priority lists,” Umali said without ruling out the possibility of Bello being appointed ombudsman. 

Records showed Bello has a pending criminal complaint at the ombudsman docketed as OMB-C-C-17-0341 and administrative complaint OMB-C-A-17-0295.

Ten aspirants are vying to replace Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, who will retire on July 27.

Aside from Bello, the aspirants are Supreme Court Justice Samuel Martires, Sandiganbayan Justice Efren dela Cruz, Special Prosecutor Edilberto Sandoval, Judge Carlos Espero II and lawyers Edna Herrera-Batacan, Rey Nathaniel Ifurung, Rainier Madrid, Felito Ramirez and Rex Rico.

They will face the JBC in public interviews tomorrow.

‘All is not lost’

Lawyer Jose Mejia, a regular member of the JBC representing the academic sector, said Bello could still make it to the JBC shortlist if he would be able to secure a clearance from the ombudsman.

“Disqualification of applicants who have pending case before the ombudsman is actually not automatic. They have up to the time of the final deliberations of our executive committee to be cleared (by the ombudsman),” Mejia told The STAR in a text message.

The anti-graft office issues clearance to applicants for vacant positions in the same office and the judiciary to certify that the charges against them have been dismissed.

Mejia stressed that the JBC only considers clearances issued by the ombudsman.

“In regular cases, there is no distinction whether the cases are mere harassment suits or not,” he said when asked if the JBC would consider the nature of pending cases against applicants.

He cited several cases in the past wherein applicants with pending cases were able to secure clearances from the ombudsman and made it to the JBC shortlist.

Mejia issued the statement to clarify a report of The STAR that said Bello has been disqualified from the ombudsman position due to the pending criminal and administrative charges he is facing before the anti-graft agency.

Martires opposed

Meanwhile, the JBC received a letter opposing the nomination of Martires to the ombudsman post.

In a six-page letter, 18 Catholic priests, evangelical pastors and theology professors urged the council to disqualify Martires due to his failure to meet the requirement of probity.

The group cited several decisions of Martires in the judiciary, including his refusal to inhibit in a quo warranto case against ousted chief justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.

They also cited his “biased line of questioning” during the oral arguments on the case. – With Edu Punay, Elizabeth Marcelo

Related video: