"In absolving the (former) president of criminal liability by omitting his name in the discussion relative to the finding of probable cause against former (Budget) Secretary Florencio Abad, the Filipino people was deprived of their right to procedural due process," the complaint stated.
"Hence, the Ombudsman violated her lawyer's oath when she deprived of their right to procedural due process, a right enshrined in our Constitution and mandated by law," it added.
Morales also accused of violated Canon 7 and Rule 7.03 of the same code on the ground that she failed to "uphold the integrity and dignity" of the legal profession in clearing Aquino of the charge of usurpation of legislative powers "without reason."
"Taking into consideration the fact that the former president appointed her, her conduct of favoring the former president adversely reflected her fitness to practice law," it said.
If the complaint is resolved before her tenure expires, he asked the SC to defer the imposition of penalty.
"In either situation, she has to be penalized. The SC ruling is clear that DAP is illegal yet the masterminds of this illegal scheme were absolved by the Ombudsman," he told GMA News Online.
The Ombudsman, however, said Aquino and Abad cannot be indicted for technical malversation because they did not “apply” public funds to other public purposes.
“The issuance and approval of memoranda and budget circular, in a strict sense, cannot be equated with application of public funds under the statute,” the Ombudsman said.
The high court also declared illegal the tapping of unprogrammed funds without following the necessary requirements.
Morales also accused of violated Canon 7 and Rule 7.03 of the same code on the ground that she failed to "uphold the integrity and dignity" of the legal profession in clearing Aquino of the charge of usurpation of legislative powers "without reason."
"Taking into consideration the fact that the former president appointed her, her conduct of favoring the former president adversely reflected her fitness to practice law," it said.
If the complaint is resolved before her tenure expires, he asked the SC to defer the imposition of penalty.
"In either situation, she has to be penalized. The SC ruling is clear that DAP is illegal yet the masterminds of this illegal scheme were absolved by the Ombudsman," he told GMA News Online.
The Ombudsman, however, said Aquino and Abad cannot be indicted for technical malversation because they did not “apply” public funds to other public purposes.
“The issuance and approval of memoranda and budget circular, in a strict sense, cannot be equated with application of public funds under the statute,” the Ombudsman said.
The high court also declared illegal the tapping of unprogrammed funds without following the necessary requirements.
source: Public Trending
Post a Comment