Binay camp hits Ombudsman for using gov’t lawyers in her defense

MANILA, Philippines – The camp of Vice President Jejomar Binay accused Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales of violating the law by using government resources to defend herself in the P200 million ($4.32 million) damage suit filed against her last month.

In a statement on Friday, August 14, Binay’s lawyer, Claro Certeza, said Morales should not use lawyers from the Office of the Ombudsman to defend her in the civil suit because it was a “personal civil action.”

“Ombudsman Morales is herself guilty of graft and corruption in using her entire office and government resources for her personal defense. It bears to stress that the P200-million damage suit filed by VP Binay against her is a personal civil action and is not against the Office of the Ombudsman,” Certeza said.

He added that Morales is violating Section 13 of Republic Act 6770, which states that the mandate of the Office of the Ombudsman is to investigate or prosecute erring officials.

“It has no authority to represent the Ombudsman in her personal civil case. She should either represent herself or hire her own lawyer. She should not use the taxpayers’ money for personal gain,” Certeza said.

Sued in official capacity

But Assistant Ombudsman Asryman Rafanan pointed out that lawyers from the Office of the Ombudsman are allowed to defend Morales because she is “clearly being sued in her official capacity.”

“VP Binay is assailing her official function, which is the conduct of preliminary investigation,” Rafanan said.

He added, “She could not have ordered the investigation if she was not the Ombudsman.”

On Friday, the Ombudsman asked a Makati court to dismiss the damage suit filed by Binay last July 20. The Vice President has sued Morales, other lawmakers, and political rivals over what his camp called “concerted actions of all groups that contributed to destroying the VP.”

Aside from Morales, the other respondents in the case are Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, Senator Alan Peter Cayetano, Caloocan City Representative Edgar Erice, the Philippine Daily Inquirer, Binay’s political rivals in Makati, and members and officers of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC).

Certeza earlier said that the suit was the Vice President’s response to the corruption allegations hurled against him, including accusations of ill-gotten wealth.

Over the past year, Binay has faced multiple plunder complaints and investigations over allegedly overpriced projects when he was mayor of Makati. In May, the Court of Appeals issued a freeze order on 242 bank accounts of Binay, his family, and his alleged dummies because of “unlawful activities.” 

‘Prejudging’ Binay 

The damage suit against the 13 defendants was Binay’s attempt to fight back against what his camp called an orchestrated effort to “maliciously destroy his character and reputation” by repeatedly spreading corruption allegations “despite the fact that these have not been proven in court.” 

In the complaint, the Vice President claimed that the respondents’ actions were part of an attempt to discredit him and “ensure his defeat” in the 2016 presidential elections.

Certeza said the Ombudsman was included in the damage suit for prejudging the plunder cases against Binay and for publicly stating that the evidence against the Vice President was strong.

“She continues to articulate in public that the evidence against the Vice President is strong. He is a sitting vice president, and only removable by impeachment. In her statements, you really see her obvious bias against the VP,” Certeza said in July.

He also accused Morales of exhibiting a “bellicose attitude” against Binay, noting some of the Ombudsman’s recent moves that the Vice President’s camp saw as “an extraordinary interest” in his prosecution:

• The Ombudsman’s decision to uphold the suspension of Binay’s son, Makati Mayor Jejomar Erwin Binay Jr, in March, after calling the temporary restraining order (TRO) against the suspension “moot and academic.”
• Her petition before the Supreme Court questioning the TRO issued by the Court of Appeals against Binay’s suspension, “despite the fact that this is the role of the Office of the Solicitor General.”
• Her statements opposing the application of the disputed doctrine of condonation to the Makati mayor’s case. Certeza said that Morales “applied the very same doctrine to other respondents before her office.”

Morales has slammed repeated allegations of “selective justice” hurled by the Binay camp against her. 

“I will not jeopardize my 40 years in government service – spotless, I will be modest to say that – just to be a tool for anyone to get back at certain persons,” she said early last month. – Rappler.com 

$1 = P46.24