SURIGAO del Sur Rep. Prospero Pichay yesterday opposed the Supreme Court’s decision perpetually disqualifying him from holding public office, saying the subject matter of the case has “no relation whatsoever to my fitness to run and hold an elective public position.”
“The recent Supreme Court decision only resolved the complaints filed against me before the Office of the Ombudsman. It must be emphasized that this Supreme Court decision is not a petition for disqualification of my candidacy as congressman,” Pichay said in a statement.
The High Court has rejected Pichay’s appeal to reverse his conviction by the Office of the Ombudsman, Sandiganbayan and the Court of Appeals in connection with the purchase of the Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) of more than 440, 000 shares of Express Savings Bank Incorporated (ESBI).
In junking Pichay’s petition, the First Division of the high court debunked his claim that he was denied due process and the right to a speedy trial when he was found guilty of grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of LWUA when he authorized, as acting chairman, the purchase of 445,337 ESBI shares, which equates to the agency’s 60 percent voting stock amounting to P80 million, without the approval of the Monetary Board.
The First Division of the SC also affirmed Pichay’s disqualification from public office as it ruled that he had no legal basis to question the Office of the Ombudsman’s decision to perpetually bar him from government employment and public office.
Pichay however insisted that the SC cannot bar him from seeking and holding public office because “it did not specifically and categorically rule on my qualification or disqualification to run as congressman.”
Since the decision is not yet final and executory, Pichay said he is “determined to exhaust all possible legal remedies accorded to me by law.”
“Given this, I stand by my position that the Ombudsman has no authority to discipline the Members of Congress,” Pichay said.
The lawmaker cited Section 21 of Republic Act No. 6770 which provides that the Office of the Ombudsman “shall have disciplinary authority over all elective and appointive officials of the government and its subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies, including Members of the Cabinet, local government, government- owned or controlled corporations and their subsidiaries, except over officials who may be removed only by impeachment or over Members of Congress and the Judiciary. “
He also noted that the Civil Service Commission has issued Resolution No. 01-0365, which further clarified that the penalty of perpetual disqualification from reemployment in the government service “pertains to appointive positions and does not apply to elective positions.”
Pichay said his political opponents are the ones behind the complaint.
“The malicious filing of nuisance petitions have been the hobby of my opponents and the digging of my old cases has become part of their political tools. Clearly, my opponents fear the voice of the people in Surigao del Sur come election day,” he said.
Pichay also appealed for sobriety among his supporters.
“Bearing in mind the fact that ours is a judicial system that applies and interprets the law free from political bias, I implore my supporters and well-wishers to remain calm. I continue to remain unshaken in my belief that the people of Surigao del Sur, who have been consistently and repeatedly freely giving me their mandate and trust, are with me in this battle,” he said.
