4/21/2015 Carpio, Sereno suggest revisiting condonation doctrine

http://www.rappler.com/nation/90648-carpio-sereno-revisit-condonation-doctrine?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=referral 1/6

Aquino signs lawexpanding ...PHILIPPINES

Rangkuman hari ketigaKAA: ...INDONESIA

Would you bike forfireflies?MOVEPH

Carpio, Sereno suggest revisiting condonationdoctrineBinay's lawyer argues that voters' actual knowledge of the alleged misdeeds of a publicofficial is not required for the application of the condonation doctrine

Buena BernalUpdated 6:20 PM, Apr 21, 2015

SUPPORT. The top two officials of the High Court express support for revisiting the condonation doctrine.Left photo from the SC website/right photo by Leane Jazul/Rappler

BAGUIO CITY, Philippines The top two officials of the Supreme Court (SC) alreadyexpressed initial support for proposals seeking to revisit the controversial and pre-1987Constitution doctrine absolving reelectionists of misdeeds in a previous term.

Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno and Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio onTuesday, April 21, suggested a review of the so-called condonation doctrine.

PHILIPPINES

4/21/2015 Carpio, Sereno suggest revisiting condonation doctrine

http://www.rappler.com/nation/90648-carpio-sereno-revisit-condonation-doctrine?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=referral 2/6

The disputed doctrine absolves an official of administrative liability committed while heor she was in office, once he or she is re-elected.

"We should probably revisit it," said Carpio during the 2nd round of oral arguments onthe high-profile case of Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales against Makati MayorErwin Jejomar "Junjun" Binay Jr.

Likewise, Sereno reiterated how condonation will "wreck havoc on our Constitutionalframework." She added that the doctrine goes against many Constitutional andstatutory provisions on public accountability.

Carpio also cited the anti-corruption stance of the 1987 Constitution. The condonationdoctrine is based on a Supreme Court ruling issued prior to the present Charter.

Mayor Binay cites this doctrine in assailing the Ombudsman-ordered 6-monthsuspension against him.

The same sentiment as Carpio's was expressed by Sereno during the first day of oralarguments.

"It is important that this court deliver the correct message to 430,000 officials... We'rebasically saying that these 430,000 officials can commit administrative offensesranging from simple misconduct all the way to serious misconduct, and dishonesty.They just have to ensure that they get re-elected and any preventive suspension or anyinvestigation or an administrative finding by the Ombudsman will have to stop," saidSereno.

Is that the message that is going to be delivered if we continue with the condonationdoctrine?" Sereno asked.

Penal vs preventive

Coronel argued before the SC that the Ombudsman-ordered suspension against Binaywas penal and not only preventive in character.

This is in contrast to the Ombudsman's stand that the suspension of Binay was merelya preventive measure. (READ: Binay reelection not an argument vs suspension Ombudsman)

An official is suspended by the Ombudsman in administrative cases pendinginvestigation to prevent him from using his power to frustrate the proceedings, likehiding or destroying evidence or threatening or bribing witnesses. The court does this incriminal cases.

The Ombudsman said the measure is meant for the anti-corruption body to securedocumentary evidence and ensure that no tampering occurs.

4/21/2015 Carpio, Sereno suggest revisiting condonation doctrine

http://www.rappler.com/nation/90648-carpio-sereno-revisit-condonation-doctrine?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=referral 3/6

Morales had explained Binay cannot invoke the doctrine in challenging his suspension,as the suspension is not a penalty resulting from the determination of guilt. Thedoctrine condones an official from guilt in administrative cases.

Coronel, however, insisted before the SC bench that Binay's suspension was a penalty.The suspension deprived Binay of his ability to perform his duty to his electorate,argued lawyer Claro Certeza, who is also representing Binay before the SC.

In questioning Coronel, Carpio stressed that the Ombudsman's power to suspendofficials as contemplated by law is preventive.

"You're twisting our decisions," said Carpio, when Coronel kept insisting that the powerin question is penal.

Actual knowledge not needed?

In arguing for the need to revisit the doctrine, Morales had earlier stressed how such isbased on an assumption that people are aware of an official's illegal acts at the timethey cast their votes to re-elect the errant leader. (READ: Mayor Binay's reelectionargument based on assumption Ombudsman)

Coronel, however, argued before the SC that voters' actual knowledge of the allegedmisdeeds of a public official is not required for the application of condonation doctrine.

The doctrine has been applied in many cases where there is no such determination ofthe voters' actual knowledge of the supposed illegal acts, she said.

She added that there is no doubt on the applicability of the Pascual case in Binay'ssuspension. The doctrine of condonation was first cited in the 1959 case of Pascual vProvincial Board of Nueva Ecija.

The oral arguments are still ongoing as of posting time.

Re-elected in 2013, the Makati chief executive is being investigated by the Ombudsmanfor criminal complaints of malversation, graft and violation of the procurement law overthe allegedly overpriced construction of a Makati city hall building.

His suspension is linked to administrative charges of grave misconduct, seriousdishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service over the samedeal. Rappler.com

Subscribe to The Daily wRap

Enter your email address Subscribe!