Ombudsman Martires: Our performance shouldn't be based on conviction rate

Ombudsman Samuel Martires on Monday said his office's efficiency should not be based on its conviction rate, which has been on a downward trend since 2020.

Martires defended his office when Batangas Representative and House Committee on Justice vice chairperson Gerville Luistro pointed out during a budget deliberation at the House of Representatives that the Ombudsman's conviction rate went from 61.2% in 2020, to 42.7% in 2021, and 26.5% in 2022.

"One aspect of our work is that our performance is rated -- also by the international community which is unfair to us -- is that our performance is based on the conviction rate. Hindi po kami husgado. Iba po ang pananaw [nila]. In so far as we are concerned, there is probable cause for the filing of [criminal] information. Pero ang husgado, iba ang pananaw,” Martires told the House appropriations panel deliberations on the proposed P4.98-billion budget of the Office of the Ombudsman for 2024.

"Walang abogado na pare-pareho ang pag-iisip. May mga abogado na taliwas ang pag-iisip sa katotohanan. May abogado na tama ang pag-iisip. Kapag nagkataon na sa tatlong huwes ng Sandiganbayan, ang isa ay taliwas ang pag-iisip, sinasabi acquittal," he added.

(Lawyers think differently. There are lawyers who disagree with the truth, and there are those who come right. If one of those disagree with the truth, there will be an acquittal.) 

Martires even said that even if a conviction is secured before the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan, the convicted person can still appeal the decision before the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.

"Our performance should not be based on conviction because that is unfair. If the accused appealed to the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, what if the accused gets acquitted?" Martires said.

"That is our problem, actually," he lamented.

ARTA 'unconstitutional'

Also during the deliberation, Martires said the law that established the Anti-Red Tape Authority is illegal because it usurps the authority of the Ombudsman.

Martires cited Article 11, Section 13.7 of the Philippine Constitution, which states that the Ombudsman should "determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, mismanagement, fraud, and corruption in the Government and make recommendations for their elimination and the observance of high standards of ethics and efficiency."

"I was encouraged by my peers and colleagues to file a case before the Supreme Court to partly declare the ARTA law as unconstitutional, but we already have so many problems in the Ombudsman to pursue that," he said.

"But ARTA goes into the functions of the Ombudsman, which makes it unconstitutional. Hindi sila dapat nagpapataw ng parusa. Ang ginagawa nila ngayon ay nagpapataw ng parusa. Bawal po iyon," Martires said.

(ARTA should not be meting penalties. They are handing out penalties, and that is illegal.)

"Nagsasawalang-kibo ako, ayaw ko ng away. Pero kung pinipilit nila ako makipag-away, puede rin naman po," Martires added.

(I just shrug it off since I don't want to foster discord, but if they are going to force me, I can give it to them.) —KBK, GMA Integrated News