THE House of Representatives on Friday clarified that it did not initiate any formal complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman against Vice President Sara Duterte, following reports that the anti-graft body had ordered Duterte and several other officials to respond to charges related to plunder, technical malversation and corruption.
“We have not received a copy of the said order to file a counter-affidavit. Ako, personally, I’ve learned about it through the reports, and I’ve seen it on social media,” House spokesperson Atty. Princess Abante said.
“What I know is that the House or the Committee (on Good Government and Public Accountability) itself did not file any complaint, but it appears that the Ombudsman acted upon the recommendation of the committee,” she added.
The move of the Ombudsman came after the House adopted the findings and recommendations of the Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability regarding the alleged misuse of confidential funds spent by the Office of the Vice President and the Department of Education when Duterte was Secretary.
“The plenary adopted the report of the Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability on June 10. And the committee report was furnished to the Ombudsman… they received it on June 16,” Abante said.
“So, it appears that the Ombudsman acted upon the recommendation of the committee.”
Asked whether this made the House or the committee the complainant, Abante responded, “Doon sa heading ng nakita ko, nakalagay committee eh. I still have to read about it and review my limited knowledge of the legal processes. Pero I will get back to you on that.”
She also explained that the Ombudsman has the power to act on its own.
“The action of the Ombudsman was upon the recommendation of a committee report from the House of Representatives,” she said.
“(The) Ombudsman can initiate investigations or their own. So, again it was an initiative of the Ombudsman acting upon the recommendation of the House committee,” Abante said.
When asked to further clarify the language used in the Ombudsman’s order, Abante noted, “It is stated, I read it doon sa reports that it is stated in the order to file a counter affidavit that it was acting on the recommendation of the Committee on Good Government and Public Accountability.”
Addressing the issue of whether the Committee on Good Government was the complainant as written in the heading of the document, Abante she herself was baffled.
“Yun yung heading nga yon eh, kung meron naging complaint na fi-nile ang Committee, wala po akong pagkakaalam na may complaint na fi-nile,” she said.
“Ang meron po kaming pinadala sa Ombudsman ay ‘yung pag-furnish sa Ombudsman nung Committee Report na na-adopt ng plenary nung huling 19th Congress. So, the heading may state that way, but the body states otherwise that it was the Ombudsman acting on the recommendation of the committee,” she further noted.
Asked whether the House was concerned that the Ombudsman might dismiss the committee’s findings before the Senate could proceed with the impeachment trial, Abante expressed trust in the integrity of the report.
“The recommendation of the committee, naniniwala din naman ako na nung naglabas sila ng recommendation na yun ay meron silang sufficient evidence to make that recommendation from the hearings that they conducted. So, I will leave it at that,” she said.
“Again, wala pa kaming kopya ng order so hindi ko rin masasagot yung ibang matters tungkol doon sa issue ng Ombudsman,” she said.
