G.R. Nos. 272888 and 273014, August 13, 2025
Oliver Zamora and Corazon Carpio-Zamora, Petitioners, vs. Frolibar Bautista, et al. and Office of the Ombudsman – Visayas Area Office Cebu, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners Oliver Zamora and Corazon Carpio-Zamora are President and Corporate Secretary, respectively, of ECOS Sanitary Landfill and Waste Management Corporation (ECOS). ECOS entered into a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Agreement with the Municipality of Malay, Aklan, for solid waste hauling and landfill operation. The Municipality incurred significant arrears in tipping and hauling fees. After demands and a Notice of Default, ECOS sought a rectification plan from the LGU. Instead, the Acting Municipal Mayor indicated intent to exercise step-in rights under the Agreement. Petitioners offered a buy-out of their group’s investment. Concurrently, the Municipal Environment and Natural Resource Office (MENRO) requested a joint inspection of the landfill to address violations cited in a DENR Notice of Violations. Petitioners refused the inspection, citing the LGU’s payment default. Subsequently, respondents, including local officials and police officers, conducted an inspection and validation activity at the landfill site on June 10, 2021. Petitioners filed criminal and administrative complaints against the respondents before the Office of the Ombudsman for alleged violations of R.A. No. 3019, grave coercion, usurpation of real rights in property, and R.A. No. 6713. The Ombudsman dismissed the complaints for lack of probable cause and substantial evidence. Petitioners filed this Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 challenging the Ombudsman’s Joint Resolution and Joint Order.

ISSUE

Whether the Office of the Ombudsman committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the criminal and administrative complaints against the respondents for lack of probable cause and substantial evidence.

RULING

No, the Office of the Ombudsman did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The petition was dismissed.
The Court found no grave abuse of discretion in the Ombudsman’s finding of no probable cause for the criminal charges. For violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, the elements of causing undue injury or giving unwarranted benefits through manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence were not established. Respondents’ acts of inspecting the landfill were performed in the regular performance of official duties, pursuant to the LGU’s mandate under the Local Government Code and the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act to ensure public health and environmental safety, especially in light of the DENR’s Notice of Violations. The respondents’ purpose was to verify compliance, not to harass petitioners. For Usurpation of Real Rights in Property, the element of violence, force, intimidation, or threat was absent. The respondents entered the property under color of authority to conduct an official inspection, not to deprive petitioners of possession. For Grave Coercion, the element of unlawful compulsion was lacking. The act of inspection, based on the LGU’s regulatory powers and the DENR notice, was not unlawful. The presence of police officers was for peace and order, not to compel petitioners against their will.
Regarding the administrative charges for violation of R.A. No. 6713, the Court upheld the Ombudsman’s finding of no substantial evidence. The respondents’ actions were done in the performance of their official functions and in response to the DENR’s findings of potential environmental violations. Their conduct did not constitute neglect of duty or behavior contrary to public interest.
The Court emphasized that a writ of certiorari is not a tool to review the Ombudsman’s factual findings or evaluate the evidence. The Ombudsman’s findings, when supported by substantial evidence and absent any clear showing of arbitrariness, are beyond judicial review. The petitioners failed to demonstrate that the Ombudsman’s dismissal of the complaints was done in a capricious, whimsical, or despotic manner amounting to grave abuse of discretion.