Aug 27, 2012

Laurel v Desierto digest

Laurel v. Desierto
GR No. 145368, April 12, 2002

Facts:
Petitioner Vice-President Salvador Laurel was appointed as the head of the National Centennial Commission, a body constituted for the preparation of the National Centennial celebration in 1998. He was subsequently appointed as the Chairman of ExpoCorp., and was one of the nine (9) incorporators. A controversy erupted on the alleged anomalies with the bidding contracts to some entities and the petitioner was implicated. By virtue of an investigation conducted by the Office of the Ombudsman, the petitioner was indicted for alleged violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019). The petitioner filed a Motion to Dismiss questioning the jurisdiction of the Office of the Ombudsman, which was denied. He further filed a motion for reconsideration which was also denied, hence this petition for certiorari.

The petitioner assails the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman and contended that he is not a public officer since ExpoCorp is a private corporation.

Issue: W/N the petitioner is a public officer

Yes, the Ombudsman has jurisdiction over the case of the petitioner since he is a public officer. The NCC is an office performing executive functions since one of its mandate is to implement national policies. Moreover, the said office was established by virtue of an executive order. It is clear that the NCC performs sovereign functions, hence it is a public office. Since petitioner is chair of the NCC, he is therefore a public officer. The fact that the NCC was characterized by EO 128 as an 'ad-hoc body' make it less of a public office. Finally, the fact that the petitioner did not receive any compensation during his tenure is of no consequence since such is merely an incidence and forms no part of the office.

No comments:

Post a Comment