THE Office of the Ombudsman has found retired Philippine Army Lt. Gen. Antonio Parlade Jr., then spokesperson of the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC), and former Presidential Communications Operations Office (PCOO) undersecretary Lorraine Badoy guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, an administrative charge filed against them by human rights lawyers.
However, the Ombudsman issued only a reprimand against Parlade and Badoy albeit, with a reminder against further similar actions.
“The above-mentioned respondents are sternly warned that a repetition of a similar offense would be dealt with more severely,” the Ombudsman said.
Former National Security Adviser and National Security Council director general Hermogenes Esperon was cleared of any liability as investigators found that he was implicated in the complaint only for publicly defending his two co-respondents.
Ombudsman Samuel Martires signed the 17-page decision on August 9.
The administrative charges were filed on Dec. 9, 2020 by Edre Olalia, president of the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL), and Ephraim Cortez, NUPL secretary general.
The charges alleged grave misconduct and violation of RA 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees.
Olalia, in a statement, said: “We receive the ruling with mixed reactions. While we did not achieve the full legal redress and it seems like a pyrrhic victory as it fell short of our plea for complete legal accountability (and considering that the respondents are now officially out of public service), the decision sustaining our legal procedural recourse, the finding of guilt for conduct prejudicial to the interest of the service and the categorical reprimand to Gen. Parlade and a certain Ms. Badoy can be viewed as a loud warning shot, as it were.
“It also made a stern warning `that a repetition of a similar offense would be dealt with more severely.’ The decision implies that any reckless innuendo & gratuitous vitriol against human rights lawyers (and by extension, against activists and human rights defenders for that matter) to silence dissent, opposition or rights awareness, will not be countenanced and will be sanctioned one way or the other, sooner or later, in time,” he added.
The complaint cited repeated accusations by Parlade and Badoy that the NUPL is part of communist terrorist organizations and was defending progressive organizations that are supposedly fronts of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), the New People’s Army (NPA), and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP).
Parlade also criticized NUPL’s educational bulletins to remind the public of their basic rights during the series of COVID-19 lockdowns and travel restrictions, saying these were part of efforts to portray government as oppressive and tyrannical.
In the case of Badoy, the NUPL highlighted her posts on Facebook accusing the Makabayan bloc in Congress of being high-ranking members of the CPP-NPA and fronts for violent extremism. She said progressive groups are brainwashing children to drop out of schools to join the CPP-NPA.
In their joint counter-affidavit, the respondents dismissed the allegations leveled against them as baseless and hearsay for relying on newspaper articles and unverified print screens of social media posts.
They likewise argued that no liability can arise from their actions in the absence of a law that defines and proscribes them. They said labeling the NUPL and its members as legal fronts of the CPP-NPA does not pose an actual threat to their life, liberty or security.
They said the statements they made were within the scope of their “duties and functions” to educate the public about communist terrorist groups and unmasking groups and individuals allied with them.
While finding insufficient basis to hold the respondents liable for grave misconduct and violation of RA 6713, the Ombudsman held that the statements of Badoy and Parlade’s actions and statements made them guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.
The anti-corruption body said the administrative offense involves “acts that tarnish the image and integrity of the office.”
The Ombudsman said Badoy and Parlade were wrong about describing the activities of NUPL and progressive groups as “communist propaganda.”
“These matters are not communist propaganda as dissent and upholding of individual rights are vital in a vibrant democracy,” it pointed out.
“The aforementioned statements (of respondents) unduly tarnishes the image of the NTF-ELCAC as it perpetuates the notion that it is being used as a governmental tool to silence dissent or opposition instead of legitimately pursuing the ultimate goal of lasting peace and ending the armed conflict with communist rebels,” it added.
