What happened to the DILG’s recommendation to suspend Bamban Mayor Alice Guo?

Mayor Alice Guo of Bamban, Tarlac in Central Luzon is currently in trouble for a number of reasons.

First, the local chief is at the center of a Senate investigation to clarify her alleged links with illegal Philippine offshore gambling (POGO) operators in her town. Guo is linked to Zun Yuan Technology Incorporated, which was raided by authorities in March this year over complaints of human trafficking and severe illegal detention.

By the time the issue of POGOs – now called Internet gambling licensees – reached the Senate, another issue related to Guo had surfaced. During the Senate hearings, lawmakers pointed to the mayor’s questionable background, and opposition Senator Risa Hontiveros raised the question of whether Guo was an “agent” planted by China to infiltrate local politics.

Deputies were confused because the mayor claimed she could not remember basic details of her life, including where she was born, why her birth was not registered until she was 17, and what residential school program she attended.

Push for suspension

Back in April, Hontiveros and Senator Sherwin Gatchalian called on the Department of Interior (DILG) to suspend Guo over her alleged links to the illegal POGO. Hontiveros said that besides Guo, other public officials involved in the POGO business should also be suspended pending the completion of investigations.

Following the Presidential Commission for Combating Organized Crime’s raid on Bamban, authorities managed to collect documents and other evidence pointing to Guo’s and other officials’ alleged involvement in the dubious deal.

In May, the DILG did not suspend Guo but made a recommendation. DILG Secretary Benhur Abalos said his agency recommended Guo’s preventive suspension to the Office of the Ombudsman. Abalos said the recommendation was the result of the investigation by the DILG’s seven-member task force.

The panel sent a report to the Ombudsman on May 17, saying, “There are disturbing findings of serious illegal acts that could have serious legal consequences.” Abalos explained that the DILG has no suspension powers and therefore turned to Ombudsman Samuel Martires.

“The DILG does not have the authority to directly suspend or dismiss local officials. Therefore, the DILG leaves the decision on any sanctions against Guo to the Ombudsman, in accordance with its disciplinary authority over elected officials of local governments,” the DILG chief said.

A few days after announcing the DILG’s recommendation to suspend Guo, Abalos announced that Guo would also be stripped of control and supervision over the police in her jurisdiction. Abalos also said he had instructed the National Police Commission to initiate proceedings to strip Guo of his mandate over local police once it finds sufficient grounds to do so.

Ombudsman-DILG-litter

After Abalos announced the recommendation, Martires later said his office did not receive a recommendation but an investigation report on Guo’s case, according to a GMA News report. Martires then suggested that the DILG instead file a complaint with the necessary documents so that his office could investigate the allegations against the local government chief.

From the Ombudsman’s point of view, the DILG report does not appear to constitute a complaint.

Rappler has already contacted the DILG, but a concrete response on the DILG’s next steps in this case is still pending.

The Ombudsman’s duties to promote accountability are enshrined in the 1987 Constitution.

Article XI, Section 12 of the Constitution states that the Ombudsman and his deputies “shall respond promptly to complaints made in any form or manner against public officers or employees of the Government or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or government-controlled enterprises, and shall, if appropriate, inform the complainants of the action taken and the outcome thereof.”

In accordance with its mandate, the Office is also to prioritize complaints against high-ranking officials and those in supervisory positions. Priorities include serious offenses and complaints involving large amounts of money and/or property.

Republic Act (RA) No. 6770 or the Ombudsman Act of 1989 further strengthened and clarified the role of the Ombudsman in investigating local officials and ensuring government accountability. Section 15 of the said law lists the powers of the Ombudsman, including the duty to investigate and prosecute public officials and take appropriate action against public officials “who have committed a mistake or who fail to perform any act or duty required by law.”

RA No. 6770 gives the Ombudsman suspension powers. Section 21 states that the Ombudsman “shall have disciplinary power over all elected and appointed officials of the government and its subdivisions, institutions and agencies, including members of the Cabinet, local government, state or state-controlled corporations and their subsidiaries.”

Officials who can only be removed from office through impeachment proceedings, as well as members of Congress and the judiciary, are exempt from the Ombudsman’s suspension power.

The Ombudsman imposes preventive suspensions on public officials who are the subject of an investigation to ensure the fairness of the investigation and to prevent officials from influencing the investigation through their position. This was the case with the suspension of Nueva Ecija Governor Aurelio Umali, against whom administrative complaints were filed for the alleged illegal issuance of 205 quarry permits.

play video

Another ongoing investigation

In May, Attorney General Menardo Guevarra said an investigative team had been formed “to determine whether there are good reasons to believe that the suspect (Guo) is unlawfully holding or exercising public office.” Guevarra’s OSG serves as the government’s primary legal adviser.

Guevarra said they would collect relevant information from other agencies such as the DILG, Department of Education, Commission on Elections, Bureau of Immigration and the Philippine Statistics Authority.

This week, Guevarra reiterated that the investigation was focusing on Guo’s right to her position and not her wealth, adding that they “could use the Senate records as a reference.”

Under section 66 of the Rules of Court, the Solicitor General or a public prosecutor may institute a quo warranto petition against any public official suspected of usurping his office or of not possessing the requisite qualifications for that office.

Guevarra said if they had enough information, they could file such a petition against Guo, questioning her right or authority to hold office. This could lead to her being removed from office or dismissed, as in the case of former Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno. – Rappler.com