THE Court of Appeals (CA) has junked the petition of Katherine Cassandra Li Ong questioning the decision of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to indict her for the non-bailable offense of qualified human trafficking for her alleged role in the operation of a Philippine Offshore Gaming Operator (POGO) hub in Porac, Pampanga that was raided by authorities last year.
In a seven-page ruling promulgated on June 25, 2025, the CA’s Thirteenth Division dismissed Ong’s petition for her failure to exhaust legal remedies, particularly a motion for reconsideration and appeal before the DOJ.
Lucky South 99, a POGO operator in Porac of which Ong was an alleged stakeholder, was investigated by authorities for allegedly engaging in criminal activities such as hacking, human trafficking, and other cybercrimes.
In her plea, Ong said she did not challenge the April 7, 2025 DOJ resolution by filing a motion for reconsideration and instead decided to directly proceed to the CA because she believed it would be useless given the statements of Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla that government prosecutors have found more than enough probable cause to indict her.
She said the DOJ panel of prosecutors also disregarded her right to due process and based its findings on pure speculation.
With these, Ong argued her immediate resort to the CA without first availing of other legal remedies is warranted.
But the CA said “it is not persuaded” by Ong’s reasons for “lack merit.”
“Where reconsideration is available, the general rule is that availing reconsideration is indispensable to afford the deciding court or tribunal an opportunity to correct the act complained of as correctible by certiorari. Where the tribunal that rendered the assailed judgement is an administrative agency or office, the rule is also considered in the light of the doctrine of exhaustion of legal remedies,” said the CA ruling penned by Associate Justice Pablito Perez.
“In not availing of a motion for reconsideration and an available appeal, petitioner deprived Prosecutor General Richard Anthony Fadullon and the secretary of Justice of the opportunity to review the findings of their respective subordinates and to correct errors that have been committed by them,” it said.
“Immediate resort to this court was unjustified, and this court has no other duty but to dismiss the petition,” it added.
The CA also dismissed Ong’s contention that seeking reconsideration of the DOJ ruling would be futile due to Remulla’s public statements.
“It is of no moment that the secretary of (the Department of) Justice, in public statements, expressed trust and confidence in the professional judgement of the state prosecutors who had a hand in the assailed resolution,” it said.
“A superior’s expression of trust and confidence in his subordinates does not equate to pre-judgment or the surrender by the superior of discretion to correct errors by his subordinates,” it also ruled.
The appellate court also did not give weight to Ong’s claim that her right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations against her were violated as she was supposedly not aware that a qualified human trafficking case was filed against her.
Concurring with the resolution are Associate Justices Lorenza Bordios and Emily San Gaspar-Gito.
Ong was arrested last month after the Angeles City Regional Trial Court issued a warrant of arrest against her and more than 40 other individuals, including former presidential spokesperson Harry Roque, for qualified human trafficking charges.
