Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama
CEBU CITY, Philippines – The legal team of preventively suspended Cebu City Mayor Michael Rama is set to file a motion for reconsideration this week following the Office of the Ombudsman’s ruling on his nepotism case.
In a press conference held on September 25, Rama’s lawyers, including his son Mikel Rama, Joselito Thomas Baena, and Collin Rosell, confirmed that they are preparing to contest the Ombudsman’s resolution, which found probable cause to indict the mayor for appointing his brothers-in-law to government positions in violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
Baena, reading the team’s official statement, stated that they are ready to challenge the decision.
“We are ready to take this latest Resolution head-on, and we are confident that Mayor Rama will attain justice,” he read.
Another preventive suspension?
Mikel Rama added that the team would argue the absence of elements in the findings and express their confidence in the mayor’s defense.
“We will file the motion for reconsideration and raise our merits there… What we are dealing with now is just a part of the criminal justice process, and the evidentiary requirement for probable cause is very low,” he explained.
He also addressed that while they do not anticipate another preventive suspension, the legal team is taking precautions and preparing for any possible outcome, whether positive or negative.
“We are not expecting any preventive suspension, but of course, we are hoping against that. Prudent will dictate nga mag anadam mi daan (we will prepare in advance), so we are ready for the best or worst-case scenario,” Mikel said.
Nothing to worry
Moreover, Baena said the threshold for probable cause in the Ombudsman’s office is quite low.
“Ang sa office of the Ombudsman, it’s still the lowest. Ang meaning sa probable cause, is most probably basig naay case, amo rana ang meaning,” he explained.
He explained that this is part of the normal criminal justice process, where when a complaint is filed, the Ombudsman or prosecutor assesses whether there’s enough evidence to pursue the case.
“Part mana sa criminal justice system nga og naay mo file ang Ombudsman or prosecutor, they will look into the complaint and the only question they will ask dili pana siya whether guilty beyond reasonable doubt or whether naa gyud merits,” Baena continued.
He noted that the current findings should not cause alarm, as the evidentiary requirement for probable cause is minimal.
“Og muingon gani og probable cause, that’s very low, ang evidentiary requirement ana dili pa siya so. That’s normal but naay uban nga naay finding of probable cause gyud. Kanang naa karon, it’s nothing to worry, ubos ra kaayo na,” Baena assured.
What is probable cause?
According to the Supreme Court of the Philippines, probable cause refers to “such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed and that the object or person sought to be seized is the one connected with the offense.”
In criminal law, it is the standard used to determine whether a case should proceed to trial.
The Court further explains that probable cause does not require absolute certainty or evidence beyond reasonable doubt. Instead, it focuses on the likelihood that a crime has occurred and that the accused is involved, based on reasonably reliable information.
Probable cause is determined during the preliminary investigation phase, where the prosecutor assesses whether there is sufficient ground to indict an individual and bring the case to court.
Ombudsman’s ruling
The Ombudsman’s ruling, promulgated on July 31, 2024, but only released on September 25, stemmed from Rama’s alleged nepotistic appointments of his wife’s brothers, Gomer and Elmer Mandanat, to positions within the Cebu City Government.
READ: Ombuds finds probable cause in nepotism case vs. Rama
The complaint, filed by a citizen using the alias Jonel Saceda, accused Rama of grave misconduct and graft for appointing Gomer as an administrative aide and Elmer as a process server.
Rama had argued that subordinates misled him into signing the appointments, but the Ombudsman rejected his defense, stating that the mayor failed to exercise due diligence.
“One who alleges a fact has the burden of proving it, and a mere allegation is not evidence,” the ruling stated.
Despite the Ombudsman’s findings, Mikel insisted that the case is not something to be alarmed about.
“We have the opportunity to correct our merits, and this is just the next phase of the investigatory process,” he said.
The legal team is also confident that the case will not hinder Rama’s political plans.
“This does not affect Mayor Rama’s candidacy for the 2025 elections. He will file his Certificate of Candidacy as scheduled,” Mikel said. /clorenciana