GR 168670; (April, 2007) (Digest)
G.R. No. 168670 ; April 13, 2007
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, Petitioner, vs. HEIDI M. ESTANDARTE and THE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents.
FACTS
The Faculty Club of Ramon Torres National High School filed an unverified complaint with 33 allegations of impropriety against Principal Heidi Estandarte with the Office of the Ombudsman (Visayas). Due to formal deficiencies, the Ombudsman treated it as a request for assistance and referred it to the Department of Education (DECS) and the Commission on Audit (COA). DECS initially dismissed it for lack of verification and certification against forum shopping. After the Faculty Club refiled a proper complaint, DECS created a Special Investigating Committee. However, the Committee recommended dismissal on the ground of forum shopping, noting that the Ombudsman was already conducting its own investigation on the same matter.
Concurrently, based on the Ombudsman’s referral, a COA Provincial Auditor investigated and found Estandarte administratively liable for several acts, including the unauthorized collection of fees and the irregular handling of cash donations. The Ombudsman, adopting the COA findings, found Estandarte guilty of Grave Misconduct and imposed the penalty of dismissal. Estandarte appealed to the Court of Appeals, which set aside the Ombudsman’s decision, ruling that the Ombudsman lost its jurisdiction when it referred the case to DECS and COA.
ISSUE
Whether the Office of the Ombudsman retained jurisdiction to investigate and adjudicate the administrative case against Estandarte after it had referred the complaint to the DECS and COA for appropriate action.
RULING
Yes, the Ombudsman retained jurisdiction. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision to set aside the penalty but on different legal grounds. The Court clarified that a referral of a complaint by the Ombudsman to another agency under Section 15(2) of the Ombudsman Act is not an abdication of its constitutional and statutory mandate. The Ombudsman possesses concurrent jurisdiction with other investigative agencies of the government. A referral is merely a request for assistance or a preliminary fact-finding step; it does not divest the Ombudsman of its primary authority to investigate and prosecute. The Ombudsman can later take over the investigation at any stage.
However, the Court found that the Ombudsman committed a grave abuse of discretion in this instance. It improperly delegated its adjudicatory power by merely adopting the findings of the COA Provincial Auditor without conducting an independent evaluation of the evidence. The Ombudsman’s decision was based solely on the COA report, which was primarily a financial audit, not a conclusive administrative investigation. The Ombudsman failed to exercise its own judgment, thereby violating Estandarte’s right to due process. Consequently, while the Ombudsman retained jurisdiction, its exercise of that power was flawed. The case was remanded to the Ombudsman for proper adjudication.