Case Digest (G.R. No. 232325)
Facts:
Domingo Crebello v. Office of the Ombudsman and Timoteo T. Capoquian, Jr., G.R. No. 232325, April 10, 2019, First Division, Bersamin, C.J., writing for the Court. The petition challenges the Office of the Ombudsman’s administrative disposition in an action for nepotism and the Court of Appeals’ dismissal of a petition for certiorari.The complaint originated from a letter of Domingo Crebello dated September 10, 2009, alleging nepotistic appointments by then-Mayor Timoteo T. Capoquian, Jr. to the Board of Directors of the Gamay Water District, notably the appointment on March 5, 2008 of Raquel Capoquian (the mayor’s sister) and the appointment of Clarita Gomba (wife of Vice Mayor Enrique Gomba). The Public Assistance and Corruption Prevention Office (PACPO) of the Office of the Ombudsman conducted a fact-finding investigation (CPL-V-09-1076), and its Final Evaluation Report dated December 10, 2012 recommended upgrading the matter to criminal and administrative counts for nepotism under Presidential Decree No. 807, Sec. 59 in relation to Sec. 67, and Executive Order No. 292, Sec. 49 in relation to Sec. 55.
The Ombudsman docketed the administrative complaint on April 3, 2014, ordered respondents to file counter-affidavits (Order, June 9, 2014) and verified position papers (Order, January 13, 2015); respondents did not comply. On March 31, 2016, the Ombudsman found Vice Mayor Enrique C. Gomba guilty of nepotism and dismissed him from service, but dismissed the charge against Mayor Capoquian, Jr. as moot on the ground of condonation by re-election. The petitioner moved for reconsideration, contending that the Supreme Court had abandoned the condonation doctrine in Morales v. Court of Appeals (G.R. Nos. 217126–27, November 10, 2015); the Ombudsman answered that Morales only became final on April 12, 2016 and issued Circular No. 17 (May 11, 2016) setting April 12, 2016 as the cut-off for applying condonation.
Aggrieved, Crebello filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. SP No. 148977) alleging grave abuse of discretion by the Ombudsman in applying condonation. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition for certiorari as the wrong remedy, citing Fabian v. Desierto (G.R. No. 1...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in holding that a petition for certiorari was the wrong remedy to assail the Ombudsman’s final and unappealable absolution of respondent Capoquian, Jr.?
- Did the Ombudsman commit grave abuse of discretion in applying the doctrine of condonation to absolve resp...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)