Ombudsman lawyers move for suspension of DOJ prosecutor charged with bribery

Prosecutors of the Office of the Ombudsman have sought the suspension of a senior Department of Justice prosecutor charged before the Sandiganbayan for allegedly accepting bribe money from the members of the Philippine Airlines Employees Association (PALEA).

 

In a motion submitted to the Sandiganbayan First Division, the prosecution has asked the anti-graft court to suspend DOJ Assistant State Prosecutor III Diosdado Solidum, Jr. pending the litigation of his cases before the court.

 

Solidum is facing cases of direct bribery as defined under Article 210 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) and violation of Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees.

 

The cases against Solidum stemmed from a complaint filed by the PALEA members before the Office of the Ombudsman in 2013.

 

Based on the complaint, which the Office of the Ombudsman has formally filed with the Sandiganbayan, Solidum, in August 2013, demanded from more than 200 PALEA members a total of P2.5 million which he then lowered to P1.2 million, to be given in installment, in exchange for dropping the pending cases against them.

 

At that time the PALEA members were facing a case filed by the Philippine Airlines Inc. (PAL) before the Pasay City Prosecutor’s Office for violation of Section 81(b)(5) of Republic Act 9497 the Civil Aviation Authority Act of 2008.

 

The Office of the Ombudsman, in its complaint, said that on August 8, 2013, Solidum has actually received the amount of P3,000,000 from PALEA lawyer Joeven Deliosa as the first installment of the bribe money the [delete] Solidum was demanding from the PALEA members.

 

In asking for Solidum’s suspension, the prosecution argued that on September 4, 2014, Solidum has already been arraigned and pleaded not guilty for both cases, thus, the information of the cases filed against him are now considered as “valid”.

 

The prosecution said that under Section 13 of the Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, “any incumbent public officer against whom any criminal prosecution under a valid information” is pending before the court “shall be suspended from office”.

 

Cases covered in Section 13 of RA 3019 are those “involving the crime of direct bribery, or of any offense involving fraud upon government, public funds or property”.

 

The prosecution also pointed out that the Supreme Court, in its previous rulings, held that it is a “ministerial duty” of a court to order the suspension of any public official upon determination of the validity of information of the case filed against him or her.

 

“Once the information is found to be sufficient in form and substance, the court is bound to issue an order of suspension as a matter of course, and there seems to be no ifs and buts about it,” the prosecution said quoting a previous SC ruling.  — ELR, GMA News