Mandaue: 26 suspended employees to file MR on Ombud decision 

Lawyer Julius Ceasar Entise, Mandaue City assessor and one of the 26 public officials and Jos who were suspended by the Ombudsman, shares their next move to fight the suspension. | Mary Rose Sagarino

MANDAUE CITY, Cebu — The 26 public officials and Job Order employees in Mandaue City are set to file a Motion for Reconsideration regarding the decision of the Office of the Ombudsman suspending them for nine months without pay.

Lawyer Julius Ceasar Entise, the Mandaue City Assessor who had been suspended, shared that they intended to submit their motion this week. 

However, he clarified that despite the appeal, the suspension was set to be implemented immediately.

READ:

Ombuds suspends 26 Mandaue employees for 9 months

Mandaue Mayor Bercede, dismissed Mayor Cortes respond to cases in Ombud 

Ombudsman suspends 2 Batangas town execs over grave misconduct complaint

On Monday, Feb. 10, Entise raised concerns about the Ombudsman’s decision, arguing that the Housing and Urban Development Office (HUDO), not the Office of the Building Official (OBO), should be responsible for demolitions.

“The notice to demolish was addressed to the head of the (OBO). Nangutana pa lang ang Ombudsman giunsa pagkahitabo, nganong naa mi didto? Matubag unta ni namo (If the Ombudsman only asked us what happened, why we were there? Then we could have answered this), Entise said. 

“OBO does not have a demolition team of its own in so far as Mandaue City is concerned, it is the HUDO that is authorized by a city ordinance,” he further said.

He also voiced concerns for the suspended Job Order employees who were merely following orders.

The Ombudsman’s ruling stated that the respondents were found “administratively liable for conduct prejudicial to the best interest of service” as they lacked the authority to carry out the demolition.

This decision followed a complaint filed by Maria Priscilla and Maritoni Melendres, who claimed the officials demolished structures on their property without a court order.

Among those suspended were Lawyer Johnbee Biton, OIC head of the Housing and Urban Development Office; and Teodorico Montojo II, head of the Janitorial Services Unit.

Entise maintained that the demolition was legal and authorized through a memorandum from the City Administrator’s Office, citing the Department of the Interior and Local Government’s Opinion 16, Series of 2006, which permits mayors to order demolitions without a court order.

He also pointed out that the city provided the necessary equipment, including bulldozers and welding tools, and used public funds for the operation, reinforcing the legitimacy of the demolition.

“Why was it if we were not authorized, ngano’ng wala man mi gikiha (why were we not sued) for usurpation for the authority of the OBO. We were not because it was authorized under a validly issued memorandum by the city administrator’s office,” said Entise.

Besides, the administrative suspension, the respondents may also face criminal charges under RA 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

A resolution issued on July 19, 2024, by Graft Investigator Carl Vincent Sasuman found probable cause to indict 27 respondents and 24 unidentified individuals for violating Section 3(e) of RA 3019. This section penalizes public officials for causing undue harm or granting unwarranted benefits through partiality, bad faith, or gross negligence.

However, the Ombudsman dismissed the charge of arbitrary detention under Article 124 of the Revised Penal Code due to lack of evidence.

Entise said that they had already filed their Motion for Reconsideration regarding the criminal aspect of the case on Friday, Feb. 7.