‘His ideas totally emasculate the essence of the SALN, and any lawmaker who would take this up should be ready for scathing arguments from free speech advocates.’
SAMUEL Martires, who heads the Office of the Ombudsman, has taken on the task of vociferously guarding the copies of the Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) of government officials which are lodged in his office to the point that sometimes, we are tempted to think that this Ombudsman wanted the information contained therein only for himself.
Martires, for instance, continues to withhold the SALN of President Duterte even from the media until Duterte himself releases it. What is the difference between Duterte’s SALN being released in 2017 and this current one?
The Ombudsman is in the news again, this time touting his proposed amendments to the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, Republic Act 6713, specifically on the public’s access to the SALN.
He wanted each official repository to have exclusive authority in approving any request for copying, reproduction, inspection of or any other form of access to SALN and shall enact reasonable conditions and rules for this purpose. This means SALN access would be denied if sensitive information would endanger the individual who filed the SALN, or his/her family member.
The Ombudsman wanted it legislated that the use of SALN by news and communications media “shall be strictly limited to reporting of facts provided in the statement, and no further commentaries could be made thereon.”
Martires displayed a rigid intolerance for individuals, whether Filipino or foreigner, making comments about the SALNs of officials, and so he proposed that these commenters be sent to prison.
In his amendments, the repository agency through its review committee will have the first say on allegations of willful misrepresentation, perjury, and incongruence of net worth with earning capacity, etc.
All these suggestions on how to tweak Republic Act 6713 tend to favor government officials and restrict the public from knowing the financial and economic status of people in government, absolving even the Ombudsman staff if ever they commit a mistake.
Martires wants violators of the provisions penalized with imprisonment not exceeding five years or a fine not exceeding P5,000, or both, and in the discretion of the court of competent jurisdiction, disqualification to hold public office.
We find these sanctions — especially the imprisonment part — way severe for violating the no-comment provision of Martires’ amendments. His ideas totally emasculate the essence of the SALN, and any lawmaker who would take this up should be ready for scathing arguments from free speech advocates.
