CA upholds ruling on Ricketts' suspension

MANILA - The Court of Appeals (CA) has affirmed its earlier ruling which upheld the Office of the Ombudsman's suspension of former Optical Media Board (OMB) Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Ronnie Ricketts, along with several others.

In a two-page resolution dated January 28, 2017, penned by Associate Justice Jose Reyes, Jr., the appellate court's Former Special 5th Division junked the motion for reconsideration filed by Ricketts for lack of merit.

"A perusal of the instant motion disclosed that the issues raised therein had already been judiciously studied, passed upon and amply considered in the challenged decision. Thus, absent any persuasive reason for us to reverse or modify the assailed judgment, the instant motion is hereby denied," the resolution read.

The Field Investigation Office (FIO) of the Ombudsman filed on July 19, 2013 complaints against Ricketts, Executive Director Cyrus Paul Valenzuela, Enforcement and Inspection Division (EID) Head Manuel Mangubat, Investigation Agent 1 Joseph Arnaldo and Perez, all of the OMB, for violation of the anti-graft law and civil service rules (Gross Neglect of Duty).

A suspension order for a period of six months was issued against them.

The case stemmed from a raid on May 27, 2010 by a team of OMB agents on Sky High Marketing Corporation in Carlos Palanca, Quiapo. Three Chinese nationals were arrested and 127 boxes, two sacks of pirated Digital Video Discs (DVDs)/ Video Compact Discs (VCDs), and one Video Recording Human I.P.C. were seized.

The items were brought to the OMB office and later pulled-out, reportedly upon Ricketts' instruction, for safekeeping.

Evelyn Asoy, Chief, Administrative and Finance Division, subsequently issued a memorandum requiring them to explain why the seized items were hauled out despite the absence of an approved gate pass. Perez told Asoy that he was instructed by Ricketts to load the items into the truck for safekeeping.

In its earlier ruling, dated August 26, 2016, the CA said the Ombudsman was right in its resolution.

"Rickets… should have known that when a public officer takes an oath of office, he or she binds himself or herself to faithfully perform the duties of the office and use reasonable skill and diligence, and to act primarily for the benefit of the public.

"The Ombudsman therefore was acting well within the bounds of its authority when it imposed on Ricketts the penalty of suspension from the service for six months," the CA said.