Case Digest (G.R. No. 256060-61)
Facts:
Poro Exim Corporation, represented by Jaime Vicente, v. Office of the Ombudsman and Felix S. Racadio, G.R. Nos. 256060-61, June 27, 2023, the Supreme Court En Banc, Kho, Jr., J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Poro Exim Corporation (petitioner), an accredited importer operating in the Poro Point Freeport Zone (PPFZ), filed complaints before the Office of the Ombudsman against respondent Felix S. Racadio, who was then Director, President, and CEO of Poro Point Management Corporation (PPMC), a government-owned and controlled corporation (GOCC) wholly owned by the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA). The complaints (docketed OMB-L-C-17-0487 and OMB-L-A-17-0532) alleged violations of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), abuse of authority, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, grave misconduct, oppression, and Section 5(c) of R.A. No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards). Petitioner charged that respondent, acting in his PPMC capacity, unduly delayed approval of import permits for a shipment of over 200 vehicles, equipment and parts, issued a show-cause order (SCO) and an initial investigation report (IIR) threatening revocation of petitioner’s Certificate of Registration, and implemented an unpublished “large-volume” policy that obstructed the free flow of imports within the PPFZ.
Respondent denied wrongdoing and contended that, given the unusually large shipment, he prudently referred the applications to PPMC’s Board of Directors; he also asserted that the Ombudsman lacked jurisdiction over him because PPMC is a GOCC without an original charter. In a Joint Resolution dated April 2, 2018, the Ombudsman dismissed the complaints for lack of jurisdiction, relying on its reading of Article XI, Section 13(2) of the Constitution and on Khan, Jr. v. Office of the Ombudsman. Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied in a Joint Order dated April 5, 2019.
Petitioner then filed a Petition for Certiorari unde...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Ombudsman gravely abuse its discretion in dismissing petitioner’s complaints for lack of jurisdiction...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)