Grave misconduct, usurpation: Garcia sued anew

CEBU, Philippines — Another complaint has been filed before the Office of the Ombudsman-Visayas against Cebu City Mayor Raymond Garcia and four other government officials for grave misconduct and usurpation of authority and public functions.

This is the third filed mainly against Garcia this month alone. The first one was a nepotism complaint while the second one was filed by lawyer Homer Cabaral, former mayor Michael Rama’s appointed head of the Office of the Senior Citizen Affairs (OSCA).

This time, the anonymous complaint also targeted Department of Interior and Local Government-(DILG)7’s Leocadio Trovela, Cebu City Police Office Director Antonietto Can?ete, and City Legal Officer Santiago Ortiz, Jr.

The complaint, a copy of which was obtained by The Freeman, accused Garcia, Trovela, Can?ete, and Ortiz of grave misconduct; usurpation of authority and public functions, which is punishable under Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code; violation of Section 7c of Republic Act (RA) 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees); and violation of Sections 3 (e) and (k) of RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act).

The complaint stated several circumstances in relation to Rama’s dismissal order by the Office of the Ombudsman last October that Rama’s camp denied receiving, thus putting into question Garcia’s assumption as full-fledged mayor last Oct. 9.

The complainant noted that “previous communications from the Ombudsman pertaining to OMB-V-A-MAY-23-0115 were usually sent to Mayor Rama's residence or, alternatively, to his counsel's office address, via registered mail. As a matter of fact, the ‘Copy Furnished’ portion of the Ombudsman's orders and resolutions would indicate that these are sent to Mayor Rama’s residence, and not to the Cebu City Hall.”

The anonymous complainant alleged that Cebu City Hall personnel headed by Ortiz, who were accompanied by Trovela, Can?ete, and policemen, went to Rama's residence in Espina Compound in Brgy. Calamba on Oct. 5 and allegedly attempted to serve an envelope from the Office of the Ombudsman.

“The records show, however, that the Order of Implementation of the Decision in relation to OMB-V-A-MAY-23-0115 was addressed by the Deputy Ombudsman for Military and Other Law Enforcement Officers to the Deputy Ombudsman for the Visayas.”

Rama’s team allegedly went straight to the Cebu City Hall to clarify the matter and spoke with Ortiz, the anonymous complaint claimed, who said the envelope that contains the decision was sent to the City Legal Office from the office of then Acting Mayor Garcia.

“Despite, such lack of any proof of service of the decision on Mayor Rama, which is crucial for the Decision to be immediately executory, Acting Mayor Garcia, on his own volition and under questionable authority, took his oath as the Mayor of Cebu City on 10 October 2024 (sic) before Dir. Trovela. Acting Mayor Garcia also assumed the functions of City Mayor without authority whatsoever,” the anonymous complainant stated.

“The fact that the Assailed Decision came into the possession of Acting Mayor Garcia before Mayor Rama was even served a copy thereof is highly suspicious. Atty. Ortiz informed Mayor Rama's team that he had heard someone from the Ombudsman allegedly delivering a copy of the ‘Decision’ to Acting Mayor Garcia's office. However, this could not have been the case because, as of 5 April 2024, OMB-V-A-MAY-23-0115 has been indorsed to the Ombudsman's Central Office in Quezon City,” it added.

The complainant said he finds it “highly irrational and irregular that a copy of the decision found its way to the Garcia’s desk, just like the other cases filed against Rama that led to allegations of Connivance of the respondents in the unauthorized and unlawful disclosure of the ‘Decision’.”

A meeting with the south district barangay captains last Sept. 6 was also mentioned, as then Acting Mayor Garcia allegedly claimed to have purportedly read a decision regarding OMB-V-A-MAY-23-0115, which was on the Ombudsman decision dismissing Rama from service and perpetually disqualifying him from holding any public office.

“If such reports are true, it is highly troubling why and how Acting Mayor Garcia was apparently able to gain access to inside information from this Honorable Office, much more be furnished a copy of internal correspondence reserved only to officials and employees of this Honorable Office,” read the complaint.

Garcia, it said, is not a party to the OMB-V-A-MAY-23-0115 complaint, which is why it is “alarming” that he has the ability to access the Office of the Ombudsman’s internal correspondences.

“Such unfettered access to confidential records given to him by the Ombudsman, if found to be true, tarnishes the ability of the latter to view the case with the cold neutrality of an impartial judge…With these acts, Respondents are guilty of divulging valuable information of a confidential character, criminally punishable under Section3(k) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. For one reason or another, Respondents divulged the contents of the Decision to unauthorized parties even before Mayor Rama and all parties were able to acquire the same,” read the complaint.

“Respondents accordingly are also guilty of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act mainly for disclosing supposed confidential information and serving the Decision on Mayor Rama in a manner that is not only illegal but despotic with respondents gravely abused their authority by using the Ombudsman's processes to harass Mayor Rama,” it further stated.

The Freeman tried to reach Garcia for his comment on the recent complaint against him but he was unavailable as of press time.