Black propaganda vs Bacolod mayor

Sarah Teresa Esguerra’s letter (“Can appeals court clip Ombudsman’s power?” Opinion, 5/20/17) reeks of malice and hypocrisy and is clearly meant to demean Bacolod City Mayor Evelio Leonardia.

Esguerra claims the mayor was found by the Ombudsman guilty of graft and corruption. How in the world can the Ombudsman decide on the criminal guilt of a public official? That is the job of the Sandiganbayan.

Esguerra, as people in Bacolod City know, is a lackey and former executive assistant of former Bacolod City Mayor Monico Puentevella, whom Leonardia thrashed in the 2010 and 2016 mayoralty elections. She has filed numerous harassment cases against Leonardia, most of which, if not all, have already been dismissed by the Ombudsman for lack of merit.

Esguerra states that the Ombudsman was insulted when the Court of Appeals granted Leonardia’s petition for a temporary restraining order and, subsequently, a writ of preliminary injunction against the Ombudsman’s decision dismissing and perpetually disqualifying him from public office on the administrative (not criminal) aspects of the case. What rubbish!

With this propaganda line, Esguerra obviously is trying to butter up the Ombudsman by impugning the Court of Appeals. She praises the Ombudsman for sanctioning Leonardia, but at the same time she insults the Ombudsman with her lament that Leonardia has evaded conviction on many other graft complaints all because he “seems to be so well-connected.” The fact is, Leonardia was exonerated by the present and previous Ombudsman from these other graft complaints simply because he was able to satisfactorily defend himself.

Every accused person has the right to due process and to use whatever available legitimate defense strategy. The Office of the Ombudsman itself clearly admits and recognizes this right in Memorandum Circular No. 01, series of 2006: “Only a TRO or writ of preliminary injunction, duly issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, stays the immediate implementation of the said Ombudsman decisions, orders or resolutions.” By availing himself of that legal remedy, did Leonardia insult the Ombudsman?

Or is Esguerra saying the appeals court’s justices are ignorant of the law? This smacks of contempt of court and clearly also violates the rules on sub judice, specifically for accusing the Court of Appeals of “shielding” Leonardia under the condonation doctrine even as his appeal is still pending in that court. It is clear, Esguerra doesn’t have the least respect for the court and has no scruples about making it a target of her black propaganda.

Finally, Esguerra asks: When will “real justice” finally prevail in Bacolod City?

Our answer: Real justice will prevail when Puentevella will be honest enough to publicly admit that when he was the congressman for Bacolod City, he misused in 2005 about P22 million of his Priority Development Assistance Fund by buying excessively overpriced computers for public schools at P400,000 per unit.

Real justice will prevail when the Ombudsman will indict Puentevella for the crime of malversation, specifically for depositing
P50.5 million of the 2005 Bacolod SEA Games Funds into his personal bank accounts and failing to completely render account for it until now. In fact, the Commission on Audit recently affirmed the disallowance of P36 million+ of that amount for lack of the proper liquidation documents.

I should know; I filed that malversation case against Puentevella in May 2014, and I have a copy of his counteraffidavit wherein he skirted the issue of depositing the P50.5 million into his personal bank accounts while arrogantly demanding proof of his legal duty to render an account for those funds. For that “question me not” attitude alone, he should already be indicted before the Sandiganbayan and forever barred from serving in any elective or appointive public office ever again.

SAMUEL V. MONTOYO, convenor, Save Bacolod Movement