When legal minds collide: Santiago, Morales argue over Ombudsman’s powers

Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago on Tuesday challenged the extent of the powers of Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales. The senator specifically questioned whether the Ombudsman’s power to directly examine an individual's bank accounts is unlimited.

 

During Monday's impeachment trial, Morales revealed that she acquired information from the Anti-Money Laundering Council, which said that Chief Justice Renato Corona had more than $12 million in fresh deposits.

 

On Tuesday, Santiago said she recognizes the power of Morales to examine and have access to bank accounts and records under the Ombudsman Law. But she also noted that "in juxtaposition" to these "broad" constitutional powers of the Ombudsman, there are also other laws passed by Congress which gives her certain limitations.

 

"We are faced with a question of how broad are the powers of the Ombudsman or should we adopt the world view or the mindset that the Ombudsman powers are unlimited as long as they are listed in our Constitution," said Santiago.

 

She specifically cited Republic Act 9160 or the Anti-Money Laundering Act and Republic Act 6426 or the Foreign Currency Deposit Act. She explained that under the AMLA, the AMLC should first find probable cause then file a complaint before the Department of Justice or the Ombudsman who shall then conduct a preliminary investigation of the case.

 

She likewise cited section 8 of RA 6426 which state: "All foreign currency deposits... are hereby declared as and considered of an absolutely confidential nature and, except upon the written permission of the depositor, in no instance shall foreign currency deposits be examined, inquired or looked into by any person, government official, bureau or office whether judicial or administrative or legislative, or any other entity whether public or private."

 

Santiago said that Morales seems to take the position that the power of the Ombudsman under the Constitution to request the AMLC for assistance and information should prevail over the procedure provided in the AMLA and even over the decision of the Supreme Court.

 

"Is it your position, madam, that the powers of the Ombudsman under the Constitution override the provisions of the AMLA as passed by the Congress, and the Eugenio case as decided by the Supreme Court. That is the question," she added.

 

Morales said she must abide by the provisions of the Ombudsman Law.

 

"Until the provision is declared unconstitutional, I must abide by it, your honor," said Morales, adding that the AMLA allows her to open dollar accounts.

 

A back-and-forth ensued in which Santiago said a "fact-finding system" must first be conducted before any account may be opened. In response, Morales said this only applies to cases involving money laundering. The senator countered that this would mean that the Ombudsman would be able to access any bank account of any government official even without a court order.

 

"Are you of the opinion, therefore, that should somebody file a complaint against us senators you can just go straight to AMLC and ask for our records without waiting for probable cause to be found," queried Santiago. 

 

Morales, for her part, said it would depend on the nature of the complaint.  

 

The senator scolded the Ombudsman for "arguing with a senator-judge."

 

Morales offered a “mea culpa” and apologized. Senator Santiago accepted to which Ombudsman replied, “Noted.” —DM/VS, GMA News