Comelec to probe ex-Rep. Pichay over alleged misrepresentation in COC

The Commission on Elections (Comelec) on Wednesday said it will investigate former Surigao del Sur lawmaker Prospero Pichay, Jr. over alleged material misrepresentation in his certificate of candidacy (COC) for the 2022 elections.

The poll body, in a statement, said the investigation is due after the Comelec en banc’s decision to cancel Pichay’s 2022 COC for representative of the First District of Surigao del Sur and declare his votes as stray due to false misrepresentation.

The Comelec en banc’s decision stemmed from the motion for reconsideration filed by Pichay’s 2022 polls opponent, Romeo Momo.

Momo sought the cancellation of Pichay’s COC since Pichay stated that he is eligible to run for public office. This was despite Pichay having been found guilty of grave misconduct by the Ombudsman in a July 2011 decision, a ruling that carried the accessory penalty of perpetual disqualification to hold any public office. The Ombudsman ruling was about the misuse of the funds of the Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) to acquire a troubled thrift bank in 2008. Pichay was at the time LWUA chairman.

“The alleged false misrepresentation made by Prospero A. Pichay, Jr. in his COC was his act of deliberately answering 'No' to the question 'Have you ever been found liable for an offense which carries with it the accessory penalty of perpetual disqualification to hold public office, which has become final and executory?'” the Comelec said.

“The Comelec will conduct an investigation for possible filing of an election offense case against Prospero A. Pichay, Jr. for his alleged commission of material misrepresentation in his COC in relation to the 2022 elections,” the Comelec added.

The poll body cited Section 7, Rule 3 of Administrative Order No. 7 or Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman, as amended by Administrative Order No. 17 dated March 15, 2003 and Memorandum Circular No. 01, series of 2006 which states that the Ombudsman’s decision is immediately executory and inclusive, meaning the decision should be strictly enforced and properly implemented even if an appeal, motion for reconsideration, or petition for review has been filed.

Likewise, the Comelec said only a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) or a Writ of Preliminary Injunction, duly issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, can stop the immediate implementation of Ombudsman decisions.

“In the case of Cobarde-Gamallo vs. Escandor, the Honorable Supreme Court affirmed, recognized, and upheld the validity of the immediately executory nature of Ombudsman decisions by stating that Section 7, Rule III of the Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman is categorical in providing that an appeal shall not stop the Decision from being executory, and that such shall be executed as a matter of course. The Comelec is duty-bound to implement the Decision of the Ombudsman and the law requires the execution and implementation of the Decision as a whole,” the Comelec said.

Likewise, Comelec said the Supreme Court already affirmed the Ombudsman's July 2011 decision against Pichay last November 2021. This High Court decision later became final and executory last August 2022.

“As a constitutional body, the COMELEC must henceforth execute Ombudsman Decision dated 4 July 2011 as a whole,” the Comelec added.

GMA News Online has already sought Pichay’s comment regarding the Comelec’s decision and will publish it as soon as it becomes available. —KG, GMA Integrated News