QuestionsQuestions (OB MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT)
To coordinate and avoid duplication of functions in their concurrent administrative disciplinary jurisdiction over certain public officials and employees, thereby preventing conflicting decisions and wastage of government resources.
The CSC takes cognizance of administrative cases involving first level employees, as defined in Section 2(a), Rule II of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of EO 292.
Preference of jurisdiction is enjoyed by the office that exercises authority over the highest-ranked respondent, consistent with pars. 2 and 3 of the Agreement.
The Ombudsman takes cognizance of complaints involving second and third level public officials/employees for enumerated acts such as direct/indirect qualified bribery; frauds and illegal exactions (including demanding unauthorized/larger sums, failure to issue receipts, deceitful schemes in contracts to defraud); malversation/illegal use of public funds where amount exceeds PhP100,000; conflict of interest and divestment; homicide and murder; corrupt practices; unexplained wealth; procurement rule violations; Anti-Money Laundering Act violations; and violations of RA 7080 (plunder).
More than PhP100,000.00.
The Ombudsman shall have jurisdiction thereof.
The CSC takes cognizance of second and third level (non-presidential appointee) administrative cases for acts/omissions enumerated in Section 46(b), Chapter 7 of Book V of EO 292, Rule X of the IRR of RA 6713, and RA 7877—excluding those acts/omissions enumerated in paragraph 2 of the Agreement.
The office which first acquired jurisdiction over the same shall conduct the investigation to the exclusion of the other.
The body to whom the case was referred shall have supervision and control over the investigation, adjudication, and monitoring, and implementation of the decision; the involved parties shall be notified of the referral pursuant to Section 5(a) of RA 6713.
To ensure exclusive jurisdiction over a case and to avoid duplication of actions; it is required for all administrative complaints filed either with the Ombudsman or the CSC.
No. The Agreement states that both the Ombudsman and the CSC shall act on administrative complaints irrespective of the respondent’s salary grade, as long as they act under their primary disciplinary authority.
It may, at its discretion, refer the case to the Ombudsman for the criminal aspect, transmitting certified true copies of the records.
Through its Fact-Finding Intelligence and Research Office (FIRO), it reviews the records, prepares the necessary Affidavit-Complaint, and acts as nominal complainant if evidence warrants; FIRO may conduct fact-finding investigation if necessary.
The CSC shall refer to the Ombudsman the case if, in its judgment and discretion, there is a need for the Ombudsman to act on its criminal aspect.
The CSC must promptly inform the Ombudsman of the development for the Ombudsman’s information and guidance.
The Ombudsman shall take cognizance of cases referred by the CSC relative to the refusal or non-implementation of its (CSC) resolutions by Local Government Units (LGUs).
No. The Ombudsman shall conduct the appropriate administrative adjudication without referring it to the CSC, but it must report appropriately to the CSC.
It takes effect after fifteen (15) days from publication in the Official Gazette and upon filing three (3) certified copies with the UP Law Center; it applies only to cases filed after effectivity.