BY GEROME DALIPE IV
ILOILO City – Former councilor Plaridel Nava has voiced his frustration over the slow action of the Office of the Ombudsman Region 6 in resolving the complaint he filed against officials of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) Region 6 relative to the controversial P680-million Ungka flyover in Barangay Ungka II in Pavia, Iloilo.
In an interview, Nava said the Ombudsman has not yet acted on the complaint he filed in June 2023 against the respondents for violation of Section 3 (e) of Republic Act 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), gross neglect of duty, grave misconduct, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the public.
“Usually, the Ombudsman will resolve the complaint within three to four months from filing (of the complaint). But it’s almost a year since I filed the complaint, but no action yet,” Nava told reporters.
Named respondents to the complaint were Tiburcio DL Canlas, former DPWH-6 director; Nerie O. Bueno, incumbent DPWH-6 director at that time; Jose Al V. Fruto, DPWH-6 assistant director; Ormel Santos, DPWH-6 officer-in-charge, Construction Division; and Helen Edith Lee Tan, International Builders Corp. (IBC) president and her son Allen Son Tan.
In his complaint, Nava accused the respondents of failing to exercise due diligence in ensuring the quality of the infrastructure project funded by taxpayer’s money.
The closure of the Ungka flyover at that time caused enormous inconvenience to the public and such inconvenience cannot be quantified by pecuniary estimation nor can it be reparable, he said.
Nava asked the Ombudsman to place the respondents under 90 days preventive suspension while the investigation is ongoing to prevent them from influencing the witnesses or tampering with the documents.
How Soon Should the Ombudsman Resolve the Complaint?
The Ombudsman is clothed with constitutional and statutory provisions to investigate and prosecute public officials and employees for violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
Section 13, Article XI of the Constitution and Republic Act No. 6770, or The Ombudsman Act of 1989, enumerates the powers, functions and duties of the Ombudsman to investigate and resolve complaints for violation of the anti-graft law.
Likewise, Administrative Order No. 7, or the Rules of Procedure of the Ombudsman, provides procedures for resolving criminal complaints for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
Section 2 of the administrative order states that upon evaluating the complaint, the investigating officer shall either recommend the outright dismissal for lack of merit or refer to the respondent for comment.
The Ombudsman investigator may also endorse the complaint to the proper government agency which has jurisdiction over the case, or forward it to the appropriate office or official for fact-finding investigation either for administrative adjudication or a preliminary investigation.
Once the complainant provides a supporting affidavit to substantiate the complaints, the Ombudsman may direct the respondents to submit his counter-affidavit within 10 days./PN
