ILOILO CITY --- The Office of the Ombudsman has upheld its order dismissing Iloilo Gov. Niel Tupas Sr. and two other officials from office for graft practices.

Ombudsman-Visayas Virginia Palanca-Santiago said the anti-graft body denied the motion for consideration filed by Tupas because the governor did not present new evidence to merit the reversal of the order.

Tupas downplayed the decision saying they still have the option to appeal the case before higher courts.

"We expected the denial of our motion and this is necessary so that we can bring the case to the Court of Appeals, and if needed, to the Supreme Court," said Tupas.

Salvador Cabaluna, provincial legal officer and one of Tupas' legal counsels in the case, said they have not receive a copy of the order denying their motion but he said they will appeal the case before the CA within 15 days after receiving it.

Tupas said the decision has no bearing on the petition for certiorari they filed before the CA questioning the authority of the Ombudsman to issue a dismissal order. The governor cited Section 60 of the Local Government Code which provides that elected local officials can only be removed by courts.

The CA had issued a 60-day temporary restraining order (TRO) on January 17, blocking the enforcement of the dismissal order against Tupas and provincial board members Domingo Oso and Cecilia Capadosa.

The TRO barred the Ombudsman, Department of Interior and Local Government and other government agencies from removing Tupas from office until the appeals court will lift the TRO.

In separate orders dated Dec. 4, the Ombudsman found Tupas, Oso and Capadosa guilty of grave misconduct for illegal disbursements and contributions totaling P85,000 to the board members league of the province. It ordered the dismissal of the officials, the cancellation of eligibility, forfeiture of retirement benefits and permanent disqualification from government service.

But Tupas and his co-respondents asked the CA to issue a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the dismissal order.

Named respondents were Puno, Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, Vice Gov. Roberto Armada and provincial board member. Emmanuel Gallar, and officials of the Peoples Graft Watch of Iloilo Inc., which filed the graft cases against the petitioners.

Tupas' camp accused the Ombudsman and the DILG of "grave abuse of discretion and gross ignorance of the law" when the offices ordered the enforcement of his dismissal. They cited five recent rulings of the Supreme Court which said that only decisions of the Ombudsman on administrative cases that involves the penalty of public censure, reprimand or suspension of not more than one month, or a fine not equivalent to one month salary, are executory and non-appealable.

Armada and Gallar have filed a petition asking the lifting of the TRO and the junking of the petition for certiorari. The case is pending resolution before the CA's 9th Division in Cebu.

Tupas said they are hoping that the CA will rule in their favor on the two cases but he said they are ready to bring their cases up to the Supreme Court.*NPB

back to top