Title
Tigas vs. Office of the Ombudsman
Case
G.R. No. 180681
Decision Date
Mar 18, 2013
In the case of Tigas v. Office of the Ombudsman, petitioner Rolando Z. Tigas challenges the rulings of the Office of the Ombudsman and the Sandiganbayan, alleging bias and irregularities in the proceedings regarding his indictment for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 180681)

Facts:

  • Petitioner: Rolando Z. Tigas, municipal mayor of Samal, Bataan.
  • Dispute: Involves the purchase of lots for a public market.
  • Transaction: Municipality issued a check for PHP 2,923,000; only PHP 2,500,000 given to the vendor, PHP 90,000 deducted for capital gains tax, and PHP 513,000 unaccounted for.
  • Tigas' Role: Signed the Deed of Conditional Sale before the Sangguniang Bayan (SB) accepted the offer; had the lot appraised at a higher value than the Philippine National Bank's appraisal.
  • Investigation: Initiated by the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) based on an anonymous letter.
  • Complaint: Filed with the Office of the Ombudsman, which recommended filing an Information for violation of Section 3(b) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. 3019) against Tigas and SB members.
  • Petition: Tigas filed a Rule 65 petition alleging bias and irregularities, questioning the Sandiganbayan's refusal to quash the Information and its imposition of a suspension pendente lite.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court affirmed the rulings of the Office of the Ombudsman and the Sandiganbayan.
  • Denied the 3 December 2007 Petition for certiorari and prohibition, the 17 September 2008 Supplemental Petition, and the 5 Janua...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • No grave abuse of discretion or manifest partiality by the Office of the Ombudsman.
  • Petitioner's claim of bias was weakened as it was raised only after the rulings were promulgated.
  • To impute bias in a special civil action for certiorari, strong grounds from extrajudicial sources and palpable error must be shown.
  • Alleged irregularities cited by the petitioner were not considered irregularities.
  • Filing an indictment for an offense different from that charged in the initiatory complaint is not inherently irregular or illegal if warranted by the evidence.
  • The finding of probable cause by the Office of ...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.