You are on page 1of 2

10.

Ganaden vs Ombudsman
Facts:
A group of employees of the National Power Corp, District IV filed a complaint
against Marcelo Ganaden, NPC-Area Manager and et. al., for allegedly
committing the following:

By making it appear that the assembly of the gantry towers


and steel towers at Tuguegarao substation was thru Pakyaw
Labor [contract for piece of work]. In fact, based [o]n the
Security In and Out Logbook and Security Attendance Sheet,
there was no entry of [the alleged contractors] Mr. DE
GRACIA nor JOJO MATEO for the period March 29, 1999 to
April 22, 1999, the period the pakyaw work [was supposedly
done.
Mr. GANADEN influenced a certain PERFECTO D. LAZARO,
husband of the proprietress of REMY D. LAZARO Builders
and Construction Supplier to agree that the volume of soil to
be removed and hauled from the 230 KV switchyard of
Tuguegarao substation be increased from the actual volume of
about 5 cubic meters to 253 cubic meters with the excess
payment be given to him (GANADEN).

Deputy Ombudsman found probable cause to charge petitioners with violation


of 3b and 3e of RA 3019 Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Hence, this
petition.
Issues: W/N the office of the Ombudsman acted with grave abuse of discretion
in finding probable cause to indict petitioners for alleged violation of RA 3019.
Held: Office of the Ombudsman did not act with grave abuse of discretion
Ratio: A finding of probable cause needs only to rest on evidence showing that
more likely than not a crime has been committed and there is enough reason
to believe that it was committed by the accused. It need not be based on clear
and convincing evidence of guilt, neither on evidence establishing absolute
certainty of guilt. A finding of probable cause merely binds over the suspect to
stand trial. It is not a pronouncement of guilt.
The term does not mean actual and positive cause nor does it import absolute
certainty. It is merely based on opinion and reasonable belief. x x x. Probable
cause does not require an inquiry into whether there is sufficient evidence to
procure a conviction
On the charge of the alleged Pakyaw labor in the construction of the gantry
and steel towers:

Statements that the actual work was done by the NPC employees
strengthened the accusations in the complaint.
The alleged contractor admitted that he did not perform the work
himself but was instructed by the Engr. Narciso to get his check.
Encash it and give the proceeds to Engr Narciso.
On the charge of taking part in the payment for services rendered by the Rema
D. Lazaro Builders and Construction Supplies
Perfecto Lazaro stated that petitioner offered to give him a project as
long as he will give petitioner the excess payment for the actual work
to be done.
In the case at bar, the Office of the Ombudsman found sufficient reason to
believe that a violation of R.A. No. 3019 has been committed and that the
petitioners are probably guilty thereof.
xxx Supplementary Notes:
Grave abuse of discretion is defined as capricious and whimsical exercise of
judgment as is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction. Mere abuse of discretion is not
enough. It must be grave abuse of discretion as when the power is exercised in
an arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of passion or personal hostility, and
must be so patent and so gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty
or to a virtual refusal to perform the duty enjoined or to act at all in
contemplation of law.
In the case at bar, the Office of the Ombudsman properly conducted the
investigation and received evidence on the allegations and counterallegations. The Office of the Ombudsman diligently sifted through all the
relevant and pertinent allegations, statements of witnesses, defenses raised by
the accused officials, and audit reports. Based on the submitted data and
information, it made a determination of probable cause. There is no showing of
any capricious, whimsical and arbitrary action or inaction on the part of the
Office of the Ombudsman.
The Office of the Ombudsman dismissed the charge that petitioners used NPC
resources to print and sell raffle tickets for being devoid of merit. Likewise, the
charge that petitioner Ganaden misappropriated NPC resources (gasoline,
tires and ceramic tiles) for his personal use was dismissed for lack of
supporting evidence. Such findings show that the Office of the Ombudsman
carefully weighed the evidence presented and properly discarded baseless and

unsupported allegations. The assailed action of the Office of the Ombudsman


is therefore well within its jurisdiction and mandate. xxx

You might also like