Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales gained’t buck from her place to dismiss the corruption circumstances of former President Benigno Aquino III simply to please her critics.
In an interview with CNN Philippines’ “The Source,” Morales stated she was sorry to disappoint her critics however so far as the Ombudsman was involved, there was no possible trigger to file charges towards Aquino over the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).
The DAP was a system of realigning financial savings to different companies in a bid to stimulate the financial system. It was perceived as then President Aquino’s pork barrel fund. The Supreme Court declared as unconstitutional some practices beneath DAP.
“They want Aquino’s head. We go by the evidence. If the evidence is there, if it’s rearing its ugly head, why should we not file the case?” Morales stated.
“But if the evidence does not merit the determination of probable cause, why should we go to court?” she added.
Morales welcomed the choice of the Supreme Court to dismiss the disbarment case filed towards her by defeated senatorial candidate Greco Belgica, who needed the Ombudsman’s head for her refusal to carry Aquino accountable.
READ: Ombudsman on disbarment case: Wish them luck | Ombudsman hit for clearing Aquino on DAP
But Morales stated if her critics, led by the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption, who vowed to file an impeachment criticism towards her, needed her faraway from workplace to drive her to file charges towards Aquino, she has this to say:
“If that is intended to scare me into filing a case against Aquino, even if the evidence does not warrant, I’m sorry to disappoint them.”
Morales stated she wouldn’t order the submitting of charges earlier than the Sandiganbayan towards any public official simply to subvert any try and impeach her.
“They can file an impeachment complaint. I’m not going to be coerced into filing a case against someone, when I believe the evidence does not call for it,” Morales stated.
She stated she was prepared handy over her “thankless position” on a “silver platter.”
But she believes she dedicated no impeachment offense. “I am confident, impeachment or no impeachment. As far as I’m concerned, I’ve done nothing wrong that can fall under any ground for impeachment,” Morales stated.
Morales stated she didn’t owe any debt of gratitude to Aquino, who appointed her as Ombudsman in 2011 after her retirement as Supreme Court Associate Justice.
“Excuse me, I did not ask for that position. In fact, I was hesitant to accept that position. I wanted the luxury of retirement. But nauto ako (I was duped),” Morales stated.
“Of course, I was challenged,” she added.
In her decision, Morales acquitted Aquino and his finances secretary Florencio “Butch” Abad of technical malversation as a result of they have been mere “policy makers” and never “accountable public officers” in reference to the DAP.
The Ombudsman dismissed the graft criticism towards Aquino and Abad after discovering no evident unhealthy religion or gross inexcusable negligence as a result of the DAP was “motivated by a good purpose to spur economic growth and boost the national economy.”
Morales added that there was no unhealthy religion on the a part of Aquino as a result of when the latter was senator he filed a invoice in search of to restrict govt affect on the General Appropriations Act and that Aquino knew beforehand that “acts of tinkering with the annual GAA and fiscal dictatorship are contrary to the Constitution.”
READ: Lawyers’ group insists Aquino, Abad liable for DAP
The Ombudsman acquitted Aquino of the usurpation of powers with out giving a proof. But it discovered possible trigger to charge Abad with usurping the powers of the purse of Congress in realigning the nation’s financial savings beneath DAP.
READ: Abad indicted for usurpation of powers over
As to the complaints towards Aquino over the Mamasapano incident, Morales stated the graft and usurpation of powers the Ombudsman filed towards dismissed police officers Alan Purisima and Getulio Napeñas didn’t embody Aquino as a result of the raps have been filed when the president nonetheless had immunity in workplace.
“Some people are crowing at the Ombudsman for not filing a case against PNoy. What we filed was a complaint against Purisima and Napeñas when PNoy was still in power,” Morales stated.
READ: Ombudsman vows to not sit on Aquino probe over Mamasapano |
READ: Aquino: No ‘command responsibility’ in Mamasapano raid | Purisima, Napeñas charged for Mamasapano carnage
Former president Aquino appointed Morales Ombudsman when the latter retired as Supreme Court affiliate justice in 2011.
Morales is about to retire on July 25 subsequent yr.
During the Meet the Inquirer discussion board on Dec. 2016, Morales referred to as the previous President Aquino “corrupt-free.”
“You have to give it to him. He is corrupt-free,” Morales stated./rga
Ombudsman on Aquino: He’s corrupt-free
Ombudsman: 5 circumstances vs Aquino nonetheless being probed
Ombudsman Morales on impeachment strikes: Go on, child
Subscribe to INQUIRER PLUS to get entry to The Philippine Daily Inquirer & different 70+ titles, share as much as 5 devices, hearken to the information, obtain as early as 4am & share articles on social media. Call 896 6000.