Ombudsman orders dismissal of Leyte town mayor, 10 others

Palompon, Leyte Mayor Ramon Oñate. | contributed photo

LAPU-LAPU CITY, Cebu – It seems that Palompon, Leyte Mayor Ramon Oñate is now in deep trouble after he received another adverse ruling from the Office of the Ombudsman on a case that was filed against him.

In a decision dated September 24, 2024, Ombudsman Samuel Martires found Oñate and 10 others guilty of grave misconduct and serious dishonesty for the misappropriation of public funds for the purchase of fuel, oil and lubricant for three vehicles that have been decommissioned and were already beyond repair.

The other respondents of the case were Sangguniang Bayan Members Margarito Bensig Jr. Esperanza Sumalinog, Emmanuel Laurente, Consuelo Bonghanoy, Ranulfo Gaspan Sr., Jonathan Yap, and Rene Camposano;  drivers Alfredo Lubiano and Pablo Chavarria; and local legislative staff Debbi Ann Dignos.

READ: Palompon mayor told to cease operation of Sky Garden

Oñate and the 10 others were ordered dismissed from service and their eligibility cancelled.  At the same time, the Ombudsman has ordered the forfeiture of their retirement benefits and their perpetual disqualification from government service pursuant to Section 10, Rule III of Administrative Order No. 07, as amended by Administrative Order No. 17, in relation to Section 25 of Republic Act No. 6770.

“In case the penalty of Dismissal can no longer be enforced due to respondents’ separation from the service, the penalty shall be converted into a FINE equivalent to their salary for one (1) year, payable to the Office of the Ombudsman, and may de deducted from their retired benefits, accrued leave credits, or any receivables from their office,” read part of the decision.

READ: Palompon mayor’s petition dismissed: Court upholds SW validity

The Ombudsman’s decision stemmed from a case filed by Ian Jay Arevalo, the late barangay captain of San Isidro, Palompon.

Abuse of power

The next day or on September 25, the Ombudsman also ordered Oñate’s suspension for one year without pay after the he was found guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service and simple neglect of duty.

CDN Digital was able to publish first about the Sept. 25 ruling after it secured a copy of the decision.

READ: Ombudsman suspends Palompon, Leyte Mayor Oñate

In its Sept. 24 ruling, the Ombudsman said that the complainant presented facts and evidence as to the respondents’ abuse of their power and positions through the misappropriation of public funds.

The decision places the municipality of Palompon in an unprecedented executive and legislative crisis, as not only the municipal mayor was ordered dismissed but also the seven SB members.

Furthermore, questions were raised on the decision of Oñate to seek reelection after he filed his Certificate of Candidacy last October 2, 2024.

READ: Expired canned goods, poultry wastes unearthed in the farm of Palompon mayor

Disqualification

In an earlier interview, Comelec Chairman George Garcia said that, “If a candidate has a perpetual disqualification to hold public office slapped by the Ombudsman, we will immediately implement that. We believe that the decision of the Ombudsman is immediately executory although it may not be final.”

The Ombudsman’s decision on Oñate’s was already endorsed to the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) on September 26, 2024.

Oñate said in a statement that the complaint that Arevalo filed against him was a mere rehash of an earlier complaint filed by the late Vergilio Padilla Jr., a former driver of LGU Palompon before the Office of the Ombudsman in the Visayas last August 23, 2021.

In a joint resolution dated February 2, 2023, the Office of the Ombudsman in the Visayas ordered the case dismissed. It said that the SB Secretary, who was the approving officer for the issuance of a fuel, oil and lubricant withdrawal slip and the driver’s trip tickets, was the one responsible to correct the mistake.

And since the purchase of oil, fuel and lubricants were approved by the SB Secretary, the said transaction was presumed in order.

In addition, this was not disallowed by the Commission on Audit (COA).

“The decision [of the Ombudsman] was a mere stash of political harassment,” Oñate said.