A falsehood deserving Ombudsman action

Two days ago, a conceivable falsehood appeared on this paper. No, this news medium did not lie. Its source of the news could be the one peddling the false story. The news was that Cebu City Councilor Augustos Pe, Jr., said he has already transferred his residence to the south district of this city two years ago. He accordingly made that claim in support of his intention to run for city council beyond the third term.

Let us backtrack a little bit. There is a term limit for local government officials. We all know that a councilor, like Mr. Pe, cannot serve more than a continuous period of three consecutive terms. So, if he got elected in 2004, (did he truly win it?) that was his first term. His second and third terms commenced in the 2007 and 2010 elections. So, by the end of this 2010-2013 term, he will have served his third consecutive term and in effect, he is disqualified to run for another term because that will be his fourth.

In his intention to circumvent the law, Councilor Pe claimed (and this was the news story carried by The FREEMAN) that he already transferred his residence to the south district two years ago even before the 2010 elections. He wanted to show that when the 2013 elections come, he would run for councilor to represent the south district because he would be already legally barred from representing the north district.

Whoever said that a little learning is a dangerous thing did not have in mind this Cebu City local legislator. A little learning in law would indeed be dangerous in the pronouncements of legal matters by a non lawyer like Councilor Pe. What the councilor said was a source of falsehood without his knowing it. It might even give way to a prosecution for falsification of document and the councilor would not know why.

When he filed his certificate of candidacy for his third term as councilor, he must have recorded an entry in that document that would appertain to his residence. For sure, he wrote there that he was a resident of a barangay in the north district. Another entry like his being truly residing in the south district would subject him to a disqualification. And he was not foolish to open the chance of a legal attack on his residency.

A legal requirement for candidates must have even compelled him to write in his Certificate of Candidacy that he had been a resident in the North District for so long a time as would qualify him to be a candidate. And that certificate was filed by him sometime in November or December 2009.

If, he was honest in revealing to The FREEMAN lately that he had been residing in the south district for two years ante, then his certificate of candidacy contained a false entry. He was already a resident of the South District (and therefore he was not anymore residing in the North District) when he filed his certificate where he wrote that he was residing still somewhere in the north. Because that instrument is certainly a public document, Councilor Pe opened the avenue for his being criminally prosecuted.

I have recently been listening to the profound lectures of Assistant Ombudsman Virginia P. Santiago. In essence, AO Santiago claimed that her office would investigate even without any complainant a palpable case. Following that line, I believe that the Office of the Ombudsman would initiate an investigation into the claim by Councilor Pe, that he had been a two-year resident of the South District because the clear consequence of that statement was a dishonest claim and virtual admission to have falsified his Certificate of Candidacy.

But, I expect the councilor, in a belated attempt, to deny having made that assertion. He probably may say that he was misquoted or that his statement was twisted. He may even sue this paper for telling a story that paves the way for a criminal case being filed against him. Any of those actions will only expose all the more the paucity of his learning. These moves will not serve his selfish interest but will only surely only aggravate his situation. But, then again, does he know?