Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City
FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

FIRST REGULAR SESSION

COMMITTEE REPORT NO.

Submitted by the Committee on Justice on __—15beC 2010

Re: House Bill No. 3916

Recommending its approval in substitution of House Bill No. 3601

Sponsors: Representatives Niel C. Tupas, Jr, Lorenzo R. Tafiada JI, Joseph
Emilio A. Abaya, Raul A. Daza, Henedina R. Abad, Rodolfo C
Farifas and Reynaldo V. Umali

Mr. Speaker:

The Committee on Justice to which was referred House Bill No, 3691,
introduced by Representative Niel C. Tupas, Jr, Lorenzo R. Tafiada Ill, Joseph
Emilio A. Abaya, Raul A. Daza, Henedina R. Abad, entitled:

“AN ACT

AMENDING SECTIONS 24 AND 27 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO
6770, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS “THE OMBUDSMAN ACT OF
1989", TO DEFINE THE “PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION”
AUTHORITY OF THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN OR HIS.
DEPUTY OVER ELECTIVE AND APPOINTIVE OFFICIALS, AND
THE EFFECTIVITY OF THE DECISIONS OF THE OFFICE OF
THE OMBUDSMAN”

has considered the same and recommends that the attached House Bill No
entitled:

“AN ACT
AMENDING SECTIONS 24 AND 27 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO 6770,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS “THE OMBUDSMAN ACT OF 1989", TO
DEFINE THE “PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION” AUTHORITY OF THE
OMBUDSMAN AND HIS DEPUTY OVER ELECTIVE AND APPOINTIVE


OFFICIALS, AND THE EFFECTIVITY OF THE DECISIONS OF THE
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN”

be approved in substitution of House Bill No. 3691 with Representatives Niel C.
Tupas, Jr., Lorenzo R. Tafada ill, Joseph Emilio A. Abaya, Raul A. Daza,
Henedina R. Abad, Redolfo C. Farifias and Reynaido V. Umali as authors

thereof.

be ae ae
‘LC. TUPAS, JR.
Chairman

Committee on Justice

The Honorable

‘The Speaker

House of Representatives
Quezon City


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City. Metro Manila

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

House Bitno,__ 8916

Introduced by Representatives Nie! C Tupas, Jr., Lorenzo R. Tafiada Ili, Joseph Emilio
A. Abaya, Raul A. Daza, Henedina R. Abad, Rodolfo C. Farifias and Reynaido V. Umali

“AN ACT
AMENDING SECTIONS 24 AND 27 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO 6770,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS “THE OMBUDSMAN ACT OF 1989”, TO
DEFINE THE “PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION” AUTHORITY OF THE
OMBUDSMAN AND HIS DEPUTY OVER ELECTIVE AND APPOINTIVE
OFFICIALS, AND THE EFFECTIVITY OF THE DECISIONS OF THE
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN”

se of Representatives in Congress so assembled.

Be it enacted by the S

ate an

i SECTION 1, - Section 24 paragraph 1 of Republic Act No. 6770 is hereby
2 amended as follows

3

4 Sec.24. Preventive Suspension - The Ombudsman

5 or his Deputy, AFTER GIVING THE RESPONDENT THE
6 OPPORTUNITY TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING, may,
7 PENDING THE INVESTIGATION, preventively suspend any
8 officer or employee under his authority WHO CURRENTLY
9 HOLDS THE SAME POSITION BY VIRTUE OF WHICH THE
10 ACT SUBJECT OF AN INVESTIGATION AROSE, [pending

m1 an investigation}, if in his judgment, the evidence of guilt is
strong; THERE iS A GREAT PROBABILITY THAT THE
CONTINUANCE IN OFFICE OF THE RESPONDENT COULD



i INFLUENCE THE WITNESS OR POSE A THREAT TO THE
SAFETY AND INTEGRITY OF THE RECORDS AND OTHER

5 EVIDENCE: and (a) the charge against such officer or

4 employee involves dishonesty, oppression or grave
5 misconduct or neglect in the performance of duty: OR {b) the
6 cnarges would warrant removal from the service [or (c) the
7 respondent's continued stay in office may prejudice the case
8 filed against him).”

9

10 “The preventive suspension shall continue until the
i case is terminated by the Office of the Ombudsman but not
2 more than {six (6)] THREE (3) months, without pay, except
13 when the delay in the disposition of the case by the Office of
4 the Ombudsman is due to the fault, negligence or petition of
15 the respondent, in which case the period of such delay shall
16 not be counted in computing the period of suspension herein
7 provided.

18

19

20 THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN = SHALL
a RESOLVE THE CASE NOT LATER THAN SIX (6) MONTHS:
22 FROM THE DATE THE SAME IS SUBMITTED FOR
23 RESOLUTION

%

26 SEC.2. Section 27 of Republic Act No. 6770 is hereby amended as
27 follows:

28

29 “Section 27. [Effectivity and] Finality of Decisions - (1) All
30 provisionary orders of the Office of the Ombudsman are
31 immediately effective and executory.

A motion for reconsideration of any order, directive or

B decision of the Ombudsman must be filed within five (5) days


18

after receipt of written notice and shall be entertained only on

any of the following grounds:

{4}. New evidence has been discovered which

materially affects the order, directive or decision;

(2). Errors of law or imegularities have been
committed prejudicial to the interest of the movant. The motion
for reconsideration shail be resolved within three (3) days from
filing: Provided, That only one motion for reconsideration shall

be entertained.

Finding of facts by the Office of the Ombudsman
when supported by substantial evidence are conclusive. [Any]
{o]OrderS, directives, or decisions OF THE OFFICE OF THE
OMBUDSMAN IN ADMINISTRATIVE DISCIPLINARY CASES
imposing the penalty of public censure or reprimand or
suspension of not more than one (1) month's salary, shall be

final and unappealable.

IN ALL OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE DISCIPLINARY
CASES WHERE THE PENALTY IMPOSED !S OTHER THAN
PUBLIC CENSURE OR REPRIMAND OR SUSPENSION OF
NOT MORE THAN ONE (1) MONTH'S SALARY, THE
ORDER, DIRECTIVE, OR DECISION SHALL BECOME
FINAL ONLY AFTER THE LAPSE OF THE PERIOD TO
APPEAL IF NO APPEAL IS PERFECTED, OR AFTER THE
FINAL DENIAL OF THE APPEAL FROM THE SAID ORDER,
DIRECTIVE OR DECISION. A DECISION THAT HAS NOT
YET BECOME FINAL CANNOT BE EXECUTED OR
IMPLEMENTED PENDING APPEAL.


20
21

23

{In all administrative disciplinary cases, orders, directives
or decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman may be
appealed to the Supreme Court by filing a petition for certiorari
within ten (10) days from receipt of the written notice of order,
directive or decision or denial of the motion for reconsideration .
in accordance with Rule 45 of the Rules of Court]

[The above rules may be amended or modified by the
Office of the Ombudsman as the interest of justice may
require.]
SEC. 3. Repealing Clause. All laws, presidential decrees, executive

orders, proclamation and/or administrative regulations which are inconsistent
with the provisions of this Act are hereby amended, modified superseded or

repealed accordingly.

SEC. 4. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days
from its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of

general circulation

Approved,


FACT SHEET
House Bill No. 3691

( Approved on committee level on November 24, 2010)

“AN ACT AMENDING SECTIONS 24 & 27 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6770.
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS “THE OMBUDSMAN ACT OF 1989”, TO DEFINE THE
“PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION” AUTHORITY OF THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN
OR HIS DEPUTY OVER ELECTIVE AND APPOINTIVE OFFICIALS, AND THE
EFFECTIVITY OF THE DECISIONS OF THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN”

INTRODUCED BY: REPS. NIEL C, TUPAS, JR., LORENZO R. TANADA I!!, JOSEPH EMILIO
‘A. ABAYA, RAUL A. DAZA, HENEDINA R.ABAD

Committee Referral: COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE
Committee Chairperson: REP. NIEL C. TUPAS, JR.

OBJECTIVES:

* To define more clearly the “preventive suspension” authority of the
Ombudsman or his Deputy dver elective and appointive officials,
and the effectivity of the decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman

«To ensure the observance of due process of law in the execution of
the preventive suspension orders of the Ombudsman or his Deputy

«To prevent damage that may be caused by an immediate execution
of an adverse decision where an appeal could still be made to stall

its execution.
KEY PROVISIONS:

* Defines the authority of the Ombudsman or his Deputy to issue a
preventive suspension order as one that may be exercised under the
following situations:

> The respondent has been given the opportunity to file
responsive pleading;

> The respondent holds the same position as that when he was
charged or investigated;

> The evidence of guilt of the respondent is strong;

> There is a great probability that the continuance in office of the
respondent could influence the witness or pose a threat to the
safely and integrity of the records and other evidence; and


> The charge against the respondent involves dishonesty,
oppression or grave misconduct or neglect in the performance
of duty; or the charges would warrant removal from the service.

+ Defines the “effectivity and finality” of decisions of the Ombudsman by
setting the following parameters:

> If the order, directive, or decision of the Ombudsman in
administrative disciplinary cases imposes a penalty of public
censure or reprimand or suspension of not more than one (1)
month's salary, the same shall be final and appealable

> In all other administrative disciplinary cases where the penalty
imposed is other than public censure or reprimand or
suspension of not more than one (1) month's salary, the order,
directive, or decision of the Ombudsman shall become final only
after the lapse of the period to appeal if no appeal is perfected,
or after the final denial of the appeal from the said order,
directive or decision.

» Adecision that has not yet become final cannot be executed or
implemented pending appeal.

> The period of suspension shall be reduced from six (6) months
to three (3) months.

* Gives the Office of the Ombudsman a period of six (6) months within
which to resolve the case to reckon from the date the case is submitted
for decision.

RELATED LAWS:

Sections 24 & 27, R.A. No. 6770 or the “Ombudsman Act of 1989”