Monday, March 05, 2007 Anti-graft body junks mayor's plea on dismissal order
DISMISSED Pasay Mayor Wenceslao Trinidad suffered another setback when the Office of the Ombudsman rejected his plea to reverse its January 12 resolution ousting him from his post in connection with the anomalous garbage disposal contract.
In a ruling issued by Ombudswoman Merceditas Gutierrez dated Feb. 23, 2007, the anti-graft court dismissed the arguments raised by Trinidad and by dismissed Vice Mayor Antonino Calixto and eight other suspended councilors that they were denied due process and that the Ombudsman exceeded its authority when it immediately issued the dismissal order without granting them the right to answer the allegations raised against them.
Gutierrez stressed that "her office could not be accused of evident bias since all the parties submitted their position papers and the respondents even tried to disprove the evidence presented by the complainants and the witnesses."
Likewise, she said there is no sense for the respondents to malign the Ombudsman, which sifted through official records and minutes of meetings of the Pasay City Council to determine if there is a conspiracy among the respondents to enter into the garbage contract without the benefit of a public bidding.
"For four months, Pasay City officials could have conducted the public bidding but chose not to, which was offensive to law and public morals. From Sept. 1 to Dec. 31, 2004, the bidding process should have conducted to erase any doubt as to the regularity of the contract," the Ombudsman decision said.
The Ombudsman also junked Trinidad's argument citing the legitimacy and immediacy of the need to sign the contract to restore vital public services.
"During that time, there was no calamity that would have resulted in imminent danger to lives or properties of the residents of Pasay, or time is of the essence as a result of natural or man-made calamities that would require the respondent mayor (Trinidad) to enter into contracts, or a need to restore vital public services," it said.
The Ombudsman added that the contract was passed more than a month before the Feb. 10, 2004 contract was due to expire.
Gutierrez also maintained that the Ombudsman can immediately implement suspension orders citing Administrative Order (AO) No. 7 that "an appeal shall not stop the decision from being executory and that a decision of the Ombudsman on administrative cases shall be executed as a matter of course."
In a related development, the Ombudsman denied Trinidad's petition to recall the immunity agreement granted to the witnesses in the case.
Sought for comment, Trinidad said he expect the ruling since his "enemies have strong political connection."
"We expect the usual ruling. But what is really surprising is that we are party here and yet we do not have a copy of the resolution," said Trinidad referring to the series of legal setbacks he sustained since the case broke out last year.
Without naming names, Trinidad said it only showed the clout of his enemies even as he complained the "lack of the rule of law." "They were the ones saying we should respect the rule of law, yet they are the ones violating it," he said.
He said they would question the Ombudsman ruling before the Court of Appeals (CA).
The controversy erupted last year when the Ombudsman suspended Trinidad, Calixto and the councilors for six months which was later upgraded to a dismissal when the suspension lapsed prompting the respondents to cry foul.
Trinidad pointed to his political rivals led by Pasay Representative Consolacion Dy and acting Mayor Alan Panaligan as those behind his dismissal by the Ombudsman. (AH/Sunnex)
