(Eagle News) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the disbarment complaint filed by Greco Belgica against Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales for “lack of merit.”
In a press conference, SC spokesperson Theodore Te said that in “unanimously” dismissing the March 24 complaint filed by the former Manila City Councilor, the SC took note of “previous dispositions” in other similar petitions that “reiterate the same rule.”
Belgica had alleged in the complaint that Morales had violated the Code of Professional Responsibility when, acting on four cases dated March 3, she approved a resolution which dismissed criminal and administrative charges against former President Benigno Aquino III in connection with the disbursement acceleration program.
The DAP, which had been ruled unconstitutional by the SC, is a mechanism by which, among others, funds are allocated to projects not outlined in the General Appropriations Act.
Belgica said that the Ombudsman “lacked integrity and was biased” when she moved for the dismissal of the complaint against Aquino, who had appointed her to the current position.
“(That rule is that) a public officer who under the Constitution is required to be a member of the bar as a qualification for the office held by him or her and who may be removed from office only by impeachment cannot be charged with disbarment during the incumbency of the public officer,” Te said.
The term of Morales, who Te said was “part of the list of public officers who are removable only by impeachment” based on the 1987 Constitution, ends on July 26, 2018.
“The court moved that (Belgica’s) logic that the Ombudsman may be charged with disbarment during her incumbency, but the penalty may only be imposed after her term ends, is faulty and clearly contravenes established principle that the Ombudsman who may be removed from office only by impeachment cannot be charged with disbarment during her incumbency,” he added.
Belgica to move for Morales’ impeachment
In a statement, Belgica thanked the SC for “hearing the case.”
He said that he would follow the court decision but added that he would “move for impeachment.”
“All my best and my respects to the Ombudsman and the (SC), who also ruled unanimously that DAP is unconstitutional and that the authors have criminal and administrative liabilities,” he said.
He also reiterated what he said was the SC’s order “for all prosecutorial organs of government to investigate and prosecute for possible criminal liabilities all who abused the pork barrel system (including DAP).”
In the so-called Belgica ruling, the SC declared as unconstitutional the use of the pork barrel, which includes the Priority Development Assistance Fund in Congress, and the executive budget for the President.
