Ombudsman asks SC to set rules to define ‘inordinate delay’ in cases

When exactly does a delay in court cases become "inordinate?"

This was the question raised by the Office of the Ombudsman on Tuesday as it urged the Supreme Court on Tuesday to come up with guidelines to determine when a case is considered to be suffering from inordinate delay.

"We basically ask the Supreme Court to lay out standards and guidelines. That rather than a mathematical computation, we would like to know from the Honorable Supreme Court in what instances is delay to be considered inordinate and not justified," Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon Gerard Mosquera said in a press briefing.

"And also conversely, in what cases is delayed justified," he added.

Inordinate delay is a ground commonly raised by some respondents to dismiss their case, saying that it violates their right to speedy disposition of cases.

In the press briefing, however, Mosquera stressed that the rights of both the respondent and the State should be balanced.

"The right of a respondent being investigated by the Ombudsman to speedy disposition of cases should be balanced with the right of the State to investigate and fully prosecute," he said.

Mosquera explained that what the Supreme Court currently follows in saying that there is inordinate delay in a case is its ruling on the case of former Justice Secretary Hernani Perez.

Perez was accused of extorting $2 million from former Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez in 2001.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court said the delay in the conduct of the fact-finding investigation of the Ombudsman was unjustified.

"It is very evident in the Perez case that fact-finding investigation should be included in the computation of the period of alleged inordinate delay," Mosquera said.

"This will have a profound impact on the capacity of the Office of the Ombudsman to investigate cases," he added.

Mosquera cited an earlier Supreme Court ruling where the delay of a number of years was justified.

This was the case of Francisco dela Peña against the Sandiganbayan in 2001.

"The SC in this case did not just make a mathematical computation but looked into the circumstances why there was some delay in the resolution of the case," Mosquera said.

"What Dela Peña is teaching us is the courts should look into the circumstances of the delay," he added.

Mosquera said the Ombudsman had already filed a petition with the Supreme Court last year to revisit the inordinate delay doctrine and review it in the light of the Dela Peña case.

A motion was then filed to the high court urging that the said petition be referred to the Supreme Court en banc.

"In the same motion is a prayer requesting the Supreme Court to direct the Sandiganbayan, in the meantime that the Supreme Court is reviewing our petition, to refrain from resolving motions to dismiss for inordinate delay," Mosquera said.

Both the petition and the motion are pending with the Supreme Court, he added. — MDM, GMA News