Aguinaldo doctrine

Erring officials can’t escape liability under Santiago bill

Leila B. Salaverria

Philippine Daily Inquirer

4:10 AM | Sunday, March 29th, 2015



Reelection should not allow a public official to escape administrative liability for misdeeds during his prior term as this would lead to a “ludicrous” situation, Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago said.

Santiago has filed a bill to ensure that elected officials would be made to answer administratively for illegal acts committed during their preceding term, after the camp of Makati Mayor Junjun Binay claimed he should not be held liable for alleged irregularities in the construction of the Makati City Hall Building II during his first term in 2010-2013.

Binay’s camp cited a Supreme Court ruling that said a public official could not be removed administratively for misconduct committed during a prior term, as reelection effectively condoned the official’s misconduct.

“That is a cross-eyed simplification of the problem. The first qualification for a public office should be honesty and integrity,” Santiago said in a statement.

Santiago, a former trial court judge, said this reasoning could spur public officials to commit wrongdoing since they would have a way out in the next election.

“The result would be ludicrous. Any public official will feel free to commit a crime, including plunder, and then win reelection, if it automatically means his previous crimes are condoned,” she said.

Her bill would insert a new section in the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act stating that “any elective official shall be liable for any violation of this act committed during a prior term despite reelection.”

In her explanatory note, she said it was well-established policy that public servants should have the highest virtues of integrity, honesty, discipline and uprightness.

But she lamented that contrary to this policy, the Supreme Court in a 2010 case reiterated the doctrine of condonation enunciated in another ruling handed down nearly 60 years ago.

That ruling in the case of Pascual v the Provincial Board of Nueva Ecija prohibited the disciplining of an elected official for a wrongful act committed during his immediately preceding term.

It said the court should not remove a public official for acts committed prior to his current term, as this would deprive the people of their right to elect their officials.
It said that when people voted for the official, it must be assumed they did it with knowledge of his life and character, and that they had disregarded or forgiven his faults or misconduct.
This ruling, Santiago said, provided a blanket defense for elected officials to evade liability by getting reelected.

“By merely asserting the doctrine of condonation, erring elective officials are automatically given a clean slate once reelected. Thus, there is a need to evaluate this doctrine in light of the express constitutional mandate that public office is a public trust,” she said.
Earlier, Santiago took the Office of the Ombudsman’s side in its dispute with Binay over the suspension order against him.

Based on jurisprudence, the Ombudsman can order the immediate suspension of a sitting mayor, she said.


Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/682066/erring-officials-cant-escape-liability-under-santiago-bill#ixzz3Vm5cFeBQ
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Alternative to Oposa

I do not mean to suggest that the Philippine Supreme Court has abandoned the environment. Sometimes the solutions to our problems need not be remedies that straddle generations or excite international attention. There is still one alternative that the Supreme Court has preserved: local governments. Local governments in the Philippines are not all allies of the environment. Too many local officials equate economic development with large-scale resource extraction activities such as mining and logging. But when cases reach the Supreme Court, the Court has been remarkably supportive of local governments and community efforts to protect the environment. Two decisions of the Court come to mind. The first is Tano v Socrates (G.R. No. 110249, August 21, 1997). In that case the Supreme Court upheld the power of the local governments to enact laws to protect the environment pursuant to the general welfare clause of the Local Government Code of 1991. The Court pointed out that the Code seeks “to...
Read more

Local government avalanche is Congress' fault

A recent Newsbreak report, GMA Creating Too Many LGUs , by Miriam Grace Go (August 22, 2007), unfairly blames President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for the increase in the number of local government units in the Philippines. This increase, particularly in the case of cities has been going on ever since the Local Government Code of 1991 took effect. It is encouraged by two features of the Code: (a) the formula for the distribution of the internal revenue allotment that favors cities, and (b) the relative ease in making cities. Politicians determined to increase the financial resources of their governments have been campaigning to upgrade into cities ever since they discovered these weaknesses in the Code. In 1986, there were 73 provinces, 60 cities, and 1,530 municipalities in the country. Just before the Estrada administration collapsed, there were already 110 cities. On March 5, 2001, less than two months into office, President Arroyo signed 14 bills on the conversion of municipalities i...
Read more

Clinton: End Game

Image
Senator Hillary Clinton's bid for the White House has ended and even she knows it. The math has not been in her favor for some time now. She tried to run on her strengths as a US Senator and her "34 years of experience" in government service to no avail. Her record could not stand up to Senator Obama's charm. She was unlikable; he was eloquent, even enchanting. His record is not so bad either. She was part of the old Washington crowd that was part of the problem. Obama was a fresh face who promised change "we can believe in." So Clinton tried different angles. She tried drama by shedding tears and launching sharp angry attacks against Obama. She tried comedy--by doing the comedy circuit on television. She tried adventure by claiming to have survived sniper fire during a visit to Bosnia. All these tricks worked a little; it kept the campaign alive, if barely. They tried to change the rules--bring in Florida and Michigan despite the fact that they were penaliz...
Read more