AO Clavano: Ombudsman mulling appeals of lost cases directly before SC

Should it lose a case before the Sandiganbayan, the Office of Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla is now eyeing to lodge an appeal directly before the Supreme Court, Assistant Ombudsman Mico Clavano said on Monday.

Clavano made the response when asked if Remulla would still heed Office Circular No. 18 issued in September 2018 by then Ombudsman Samuel Martires.

This directive prohibited prosecutors from appealing or filing a motion for reconsideration (MR) on acquittals and/or junking of criminal information by the Sandiganbayan or the lower courts.

“Discussions are still going on regarding that administrative order issued by the former Ombudsman. However, it is the hope of the Ombudsman that an MR will no longer be required for an appeal to be made to the Supreme Court,” Clavano said.

“Usually, MR is used as a precondition para pag-appeal mo, sasabihin mo, I exhausted all my remedies down below. Pero sa tingin po natin, at kagaya din po sa DOJ (Department of Justice), hindi na po kailangan ng MR para mag-file ang petition for review of the DOJ proper. If you disagree with the decision [of the Sandiganbayan], you can already appeal it to the Supreme Court without necessarily filing a motion for reconsideration. But again, these are all still in discussions,” Clavano added.

(Usually, MR is used as a precondition to file appeals and say, I exhausted all my remedies down below. But as far as we’re concerned, and just like in the DOJ, the MR is not needed to file a petition for review of the DOJ proper. If you disagree with the decision [of the Sandiganbayan], you can already appeal it to the Supreme Court without necessarily filing a motion for reconsideration. But again, these are all still in discussions.)

The Martires-era policy on appeals, Clavano said, practically prevented government prosecutors from filing appeals for lost cases.

“The effect of the policy of the former Ombudsman is that he effectively barred the appeal. Because if a motion for consideration is a precondition to the filing of an appeal, and he said here, his policy was, do not file a motion for reconsideration, that means an appeal is no longer possible,” Clavano said.

“Now, the Ombudsman, in a discussion, earlier mentioned that he hopes the MR won’t be a requisite to file an appeal because he (Remulla) thinks that it will just cause a delay. Most of the time, maybe 90% of the time, the judgment is the same. So, instead of having to file an MR, which is purely ministerial, just directly file a petition for review before the Supreme to speed up the resolution and put the case to rest,” he added. — JMA, GMA Integrated News