G.R. No. 211478 - Duhay et al. vs. Ombudsman

Petitioners are relatives of journalists ambushed while covering the filing of certificate of candidacy of then Buluan Vice Mayor Esmael Mangudadatu in 2009.
Respondents include Major General Alfredo Cayton, Jr., Commanding General of the 6th Infantry Division, and Colonel Medardo Geslani, commander of the 601st Infantry Brigade, Philippine Army.
The complainants filed criminal and administrative complaints against Cayton and Geslani before the Office of the Ombudsman alleging violation of Anti-Graft laws and Code of Conduct for Public Officials.

On Nov 19, 2009, a police inspector and personnel visited the Masalay detachment in Ampatuan.
On Nov 22, 2009, intelligence officers received information about Vice Mayor Mangudadatu's plan to file candidacy and possible ambush.
Military monitored the convoy's area, with assigned operatives in Shariff Aguak and surroundings.
Vice Mayor Mangudadatu requested security escorts from Geslani and Cayton but was denied; Philippine National Police also denied the request.
Journalists, including relatives of petitioners, joined Mangudadatu's convoy on Nov 23, 2009.
During the trip, unidentified individuals sought some journalists, causing some to leave the convoy.

Around 11:00 a.m. on Nov 23, 2009, the convoy was intercepted by heavily armed individuals in Ampatuan.
Fifty-seven individuals were killed in the vicinity known as the Maguindanao massacre.
Cayton was relieved from his post shortly after the incident.
Complaints allege bad faith, partiality, gross negligence, and dereliction of duty by Cayton and Geslani.

Cayton claims he referred the security request to the Philippine National Police due to operational guidelines barring the military from providing security escorts to candidates.
Geslani explained deployments prioritized areas with insurgency threats; there was no validated threat in the convoy's route.
Both respondents deny manifest partiality, gross negligence, or bad faith.
The detail of Sergeant Joselito Andrada to Mayor Ampatuan Jr. pre-dated respondents’ tenures and was justified by counter-insurgency efforts.

The Office of the Deputy Ombudsman recommended dismissal of complaints citing lack of probable cause.
The Ombudsman denied the Motion for Reconsideration filed by petitioners.
The rationale centered on legal prohibitions against military involvement in electoral security, absence of manifest partiality, and lack of proof of bad faith or gross negligence.

Petitioners assail the Ombudsman’s dismissal, citing the duty of respondents to protect the journalists and evidence of partiality toward Ampatuans.
They argue operational guidelines permit exceptions for threatened individuals, that respondents failed to coordinate with police properly, and that Cayton's relief from command evidences culpability.
Respondents stress the Court’s policy of noninterference with the Ombudsman’s discretion and argue petitioners merely raise factual issues inappropriate in certiorari.

Whether or not the Office of the Ombudsman gravely abused its discretion in dismissing the complaints against respondents for violations of Sections 3(e) and 3(f) of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act).

Whether there is probable cause to hold Major General Cayton and Colonel Geslani criminally and administratively liable for manifest partiality, evident bad faith, gross negligence, and dereliction of duty in connection with the 2009 Maguindanao massacre.