Title
Supreme Court
Pasok, Jr. vs. Office of the Ombudsman-Mindanao
Case
G.R. No. 218413
Decision Date
Jun 6, 2018
Municipal official accused of fund misappropriation and resource misuse; Ombudsman found probable cause after COA audit, upheld by Supreme Court, affirming due process and Ombudsman’s discretion.

Case Summary (A.M. No. RTJ-12-2331)

Facts of the Case

In April 2005, Alexander T. Pimentel, then Municipal Mayor of Tandag, mandated Rex Y. Dua, an Agricultural Technician II, to oversee agricultural programs. During his inspections, Dua reported several irregularities attributed to Feliciano S. Pasok Jr., the Municipal Agriculturist of Tandag. Dua subsequently filed a complaint in July 2006, alleging malversation of public funds and violations of Republic Acts Nos. 3019 and 6713. The specific allegations included failure to remit funds to the Local Government Unit Trust Fund, non-delivery of promised agricultural inputs, personal use of government resources, and manipulating awards in favor of fictitious organizations.

Initial Findings by the Ombudsman

On March 10, 2008, the Office of the Ombudsman declared Pasok guilty of grave misconduct and serious dishonesty, followed by a resolution finding probable cause against him on March 12, 2008. However, a Joint-Order on September 29, 2009, set these findings aside pending an audit from the Commission on Audit (COA).

Subsequent Audit and Findings

Following audits submitted by the COA in September 2011 and March 2012, the Office of the Ombudsman issued an order on January 3, 2013, finding probable cause against Pasok for violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Simultaneously, on January 4, 2013, Pasok was again found guilty of grave misconduct, resulting in his dismissal from service.

Petitioner’s Claims and Defense

Pasok challenged the findings, arguing that the Ombudsman committed grave abuse of discretion by not providing him with copies of the COA reports linked to the probable cause determination. He contended that this lack of access violated his right to due process, asserting that the findings were based on unverified audits and did not afford him the opportunity to comment or defend against the new allegations.

Court's Ruling on Procedural Fairness

The Court found Pasok’s petition to be without merit, emphasizing that the Ombudsman possesses plenary powers to investigate and make determinations based on both initial complaints and subsequent evidence, including COA findings. The Court ruled that Pasok was afforded the opportunity to present his defense during the earlier s

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.