Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines鈥揘ot just yet.
Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales on Monday clarified that the Office of the Ombudsman had yet to determine probable cause to indict Vice President Jejomar Binay, his son Makati City Mayor Jejomar 鈥淛unjun鈥� Binay Jr. and several others over alleged irregularities in the construction of the P2.2-billion Makati parking building.
鈥淭here was no such thing as the Ombudsman finding probable cause (in the case against Binay et al.),鈥� Morales told reporters after the launching of the Integrity Management Program, her office鈥檚 newest anticorruption strategy.
鈥淚t鈥檚 not true that the Office of the Ombudsman [has] found probable cause. It鈥檚 not true,鈥� she said. 鈥淏ut I understand there was this reply filed by the special panel of investigators. Actually, I have not seen it.鈥�
Morales admitted that she herself was surprised by media reports that her office had found probable cause to pursue the criminal cases against Binay, who has been at the center of several allegations of corruption recently.
Like other cases, she said, the Ombudsman special panel of investigators would just recommend to her if there were enough grounds to proceed with the indictment of the Binays and their fellow respondents.
鈥淚t鈥檚 going to be the Ombudsman who will approve or disapprove their recommendation鈥�. Now, whether or not the special panel of investigators found one, we do not know鈥�. So I don鈥檛 know why they made it gospel truth,鈥� Morales said.
Asked about the status of the case against Binay et al., the retired Supreme Court associate justice said: 鈥淚t鈥檚 pending. It hasn鈥檛 even reached me.鈥�
On Saturday, the Inquirer published an article on the findings of the Ombudsman special panel of investigators that looked into the allegations against the Binays and 22 others.
In its consolidated reply to the counteraffidavits of the respondents dated May 4, the panel said there was 鈥減robable cause to indict the Vice President, his son and other respondents for the crimes and offenses charged.鈥�
The panel said the construction of the Makati parking building was a 鈥渃lear diversion of people鈥檚 money put in the hands of private contractors.鈥�
鈥淭he individual participation of [the] respondents is clear. Each of them contributed in the process leading to the release of more than P2.2 billion worth of public funds despite the irregularities,鈥� the panel said.