The controversy surrounding the suspension of eight Sangguniang Panlalawigan (SP) members in Antique has intensified, following concerns over the Office of the Ombudsman’s recent legal actions.
The suspended SP members—Egidio Elio, Rony Molina, Victor Condez, Alfie Jay Niquia, Mayella Mae Plameras-Ladislao, Plaridel Sanchez IV, Kenneth Dave Gasalao, and Julius Cezar Tajanlangit—expressed alarm over the Ombudsman’s filing of a complaint against several Court of Appeals justices before the Supreme Court’s Judicial Integrity Board. They argued that the public disclosure of the complaint creates an unfair perception of guilt against the justices.
In a statement, the suspended officials criticized the move, alleging that it undermines judicial independence. They noted that the Ombudsman had already taken the proper legal course by elevating the matter to the Supreme Court for review.
“The filing of an administrative complaint—and more troublingly, the active facilitation or toleration of its publication—raises serious questions about propriety and motive,” the group stated.
Further fueling their concerns are circulating images of the Ombudsman attending the birthday celebration of Antique Governor Rhodora Cadiao, the principal complainant in the case, and engaging in conversation with her legal counsel. While acknowledging that public officials have the right to attend private events, the suspended SP members argued that such associations, coupled with legal maneuvers and media leaks, create an appearance of partiality that could erode public trust.
Despite these concerns, the group reaffirmed their faith in the judicial process. “Let the courts—not press releases, not public speculation—determine the legality of any issuance or action,” they stated, calling for fairness, adherence to due process, and the independence of the justice system from media influence or personal relationships.
Ombudsman’s Legal Challenge Against Justices
On March 21, the Office of the Ombudsman lodged a complaint before the Judicial Integrity Board against seven Court of Appeals justices—Associate Justices Louis P. Acosta, Marlene B. Gonzales-Sison, Rex Bernardo L. Pascual, Mary Charlene V. Hernandez-Azura, Roberto P. Quiroz, Rafael Antonio M. Santos, and Ferdinand C. Baylon—accusing them of gross ignorance of the law and conduct prejudicial to public service.
The complaint stems from the justices’ issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) in November 2024, which halted the implementation of the Ombudsman’s suspension order against the eight SP members. The suspended officials had challenged the order, citing prohibitions on suspensions during the election period under the Omnibus Election Code and Commission on Elections (Comelec) Resolution No. 11059.
In an 18-page decision, Ombudsman Samuel Martires approved the suspension, acting on the recommendation of Graft Investigation and Prosecution Officer III Leilani Tagulao-Marquez and Assistant Ombudsman Pilarita Lapitan. The eight officials were found guilty of grave abuse of authority, grave misconduct, and conduct unbecoming of public officers. The charges were linked to their decision to scrap funding for three solar projects included in the PHP 1.075-billion supplemental budget for 2024.
The suspension order, dated March 7, was officially served on March 17.
Election Period Legal Uncertainty
The enforcement of the suspension remains uncertain as the Comelec provincial office in Antique recently sought legal guidance on whether the eight officials could continue attending SP sessions despite the Ombudsman’s order. The Comelec acknowledged arguments suggesting that the suspension, implemented during the election period, may be legally unenforceable.
As the legal battle continues, calls for due process and judicial independence persist amid concerns over the Ombudsman’s actions and the broader implications for governance in Antique.
