Ombudsman condemns leak of investigators’ identities, eyes charges

The Office of the Ombudsman on Sunday condemned the online disclosure of its investigators’ identities, saying it is now working with law enforcement agencies to identify those behind the leak and file charges against them.

In a statement, the Ombudsman said the unauthorized release of the identities of its investigators was meant to intimidate government personnel and put their safety at risk.

“The Office of the Ombudsman strongly condemns the malicious online disclosure of our investigators’ identities. This unauthorized leak is a blatant attempt to intimidate public servants and directly jeopardizes their personal safety,” it said.

It added it is coordinating with the National Bureau of Investigation and the Philippine National Police Anti-Cybercrime Group to identify those responsible.

Moreover, the statement noted that those behind the leak and the circulation of the documents may face charges under the Data Privacy Act and the Cybercrime Prevention Act.

The Ombudsman also addressed recent complaints involving high-ranking officials, saying the filings are part of a broader legal strategy.

“Regarding the recent filings involving high-ranking officials, the public is advised that these actions are part of a deliberate tactical sequence,” it said.

According to the Ombudsman, the complaint that first reached the courts did so because it was ahead in the office’s investigative process.

“This specific complaint reached the courts first due to its position in our investigative pipeline, but it is merely a preliminary component of a broader, multi-stage legal strategy,” it said.

The statement added that the initial filings were intended to protect the State’s interests and prevent the possible flight of individuals or movement of assets while related cases continue to develop.

It said it would not litigate the matter in public, stressing that respondents would have the opportunity to challenge affidavits and witnesses during the preliminary investigation.

“It is not the duty of this Office to ‘lawyer’ for the respondents,” the statement read.

“If the respondents wish to challenge the credibility of witnesses or the veracity of the affidavits, the proper venue to do so is during the Preliminary Investigation.” —Sherylin Untalan/RF, GMA News