Bantag insists Ombudsman, not DOJ, should handle Percy Lapid murder raps
MANILA, Philippines–Instead of responding to the murder complaints filed against him for the death of broadcaster Percival Mabasa or Percy Lapid and Bilibid inmate Jun Villamor, suspended Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) director Gerald Bantag maintained that the Department of Justice (DOJ) panel of prosecutors should inhibit from handling the case.
During Tuesday’s preliminary investigation, only Bantag’s lawyers, Attys. Rocky Balisong and Basilio Pooten appeared before the DOJ and submitted a motion for reconsideration on the DOJ’s denial of their motion to inhibit.
Bantag wants the panel to inhibit insisting that the Office of the Ombudsman has jurisdiction to investigate him. The motion also mentioned the supposed “bad blood” between Bantag and Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla, who they accused of prejudging the case.
READ: Bantag wants DOJ to stay out of the case, cries ‘bad blood’ with Remulla, lack of jurisdiction
But the DOJ panel of prosecutors dismissed the motion saying a memorandum of agreement (MOA) exists between the DOJ and the Ombudsman, providing that both shall have concurrent jurisdiction over complaints for crimes involving public officers falling outside the exclusive jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, which is an anti-graft court.
Article continues after this advertisementUnder the MOA, if the complaint is filed before the Ombudsman, it may endorse it to any prosecution office of the DOJ.
Article continues after this advertisementRegarding bias and partiality, since it is under the supervision and control of the Secretary of Justice and the National Prosecution Service, the panel said it is “purely speculative.”
READ: DOJ prosecutors tosses out Bantag’s motion for inhibition in Mabasa murder case
In its motion for reconsideration, Balisong mentioned the complaint filed before the Office of the Ombudsman against Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla, which could conflict with the cases handled by the DOJ panel of prosecutors.
“Assuming that the concurrent jurisdiction between the DOJ and the Ombudsman is applicable in this case, prudence dictates that the DOJ should inhibit and transfer the preliminary investigation of the cases to the Office of the Ombudsman since there is a question on the impartiality of the DOJ raised by the respondent, and none of the parties, in this case, questioned the impartiality of the Ombudsman,” Bantag’s motion said.
“If the investigating panel of prosecutors will not inhibit, it will create a situation where the DOJ panel of prosecutors will conduct a preliminary investigation, and the Ombudsman will also conduct its preliminary investigation in the cases filed before them which arose from the same incident, the same victims and the same sets of characters,” he added.
Bantag said this might result in an absurd situation where a possible conflict in the results of the preliminary investigations by the DOJ and the Ombudsman, whether it be the dismissal or finding of probable cause for the said cases.
Meanwhile, the DOJ panel of prosecutors allowed the complainants to comment on the motion for reconsideration. However, Roy Mabasa, brother of Lapid, said they prefer the case be submitted for resolution.
The status hearing is set on January 31.
RELATED STORY:
Bantag accuses Remulla of orchestrating Lapid’s murder, files raps
