Ombudsman axes Puerto’s Bayron
THE Office of the Ombudsman has ousted Puerto Princesa Mayor Lucilo Bayron for the second time in his current term, as the anti-graft office set aside a joint resolution it issued last June 23, which had paved the way for the mayor’s reinstatement.
The latest decision penned by Assistant Ombudsman Jennifer Jardin-Manalili was approved by Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales on July 11 and granted complainant Aldrin Madreo’s Motion for Reconsideration.
In its decision, the Ombudsman declared that it “reconsiders and hereby sets aside the assailed Joint Order dated 20 March 2017 modifying the decision dated 18 November 2016 in so far as it affects respondent Bayron.”
The Ombudsman is expected to forward the ruling to the Department of the Interior and Local Government for implementation.
The Ombudsman first ordered the dismissal of Bayron on Dec. 15, 2016 after it found him administratively liable for serious dishonesty and grave misconduct.
The complaint was filed Nov. 20, 2013 by Alvin Madreo against Bayron and his son Karl for grave misconduct, serious dishonesty and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.
Bayron hired his own son Karl but did not truthfully disclose this relationship in the government employment contract form.
The attestations of Bayron in the city’s employment contract that Karl, his biologiocal son “is not related within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity with the Hiring Authority by which they were able to conceal their filial relationship,” the Ombudsman said, “was a false statement in a public document.”
Bayron immediately ran to the Court of Appeals to secure a temporary restraining order. The appellate court took cognizance of Bayron’s appeal also in the same month
On Feb. 21, on orders of the DILG, Vice Mayor Luis M. Marcaida III, was sworn in as the new city mayor.
Last March 1, the CA issued a resolution directing Madreo, the Ombudsman represented by Conchita Carpio Morales, and the DILG represented. by then-Secretary Ismael Sueno to submit their Comments on Bayron’s Petitions for Review, Supplemental Petition for Review, Application for TRO/WPI/Status Quo Ante Order, Motion to Cite Respondents in Contempt, and Supplemental Motion to Cite Respondents in Contempt.
Despite its contrary ruling of March 20, the Office of Legal Affairs of the OMB on April 26 filed its Comment on the Petition for Review, the Supplemental Petition for Review, the Application for TRO / WPI / Status Quo Ante Order, Motion to Cite Respondents in Contempt, and Supplemental Motion to Cite Respondents in Contempt at the CA.
In its comment, the Ombudsman reiterated its decision to dismiss Bayron on Dec. 15, 2016.
On 08 June, the Court of Appeals ruled that Bayron’s Supplemental Petition for Review (with Application for the Issuance of a TRO) was admitted; his application for the issuance of a TRO and /or WPI is denied; Motion to Cite Respondents in Contempt of Court was denied.
The appellate court finally ruled that Bayron’s Petition was deemed submitted for decision. The CA decision is expected soon.
The assailed joint resolution of the Ombudsman of March 20, 2017 amended its earlier decision to oust Bayron and perpetually ban him from public office and downgraded the offenses to “simple dishonesty” which is punishable by three months’ suspension from office.
In its latest decision, the Ombudsman upheld Madreo’s assertion that it had lost jurisdiction over the administrative case against respondent Lucilo (Bayron) upon the abandonment of his motion for reconsideration before this office and the perfection on (Feb.2) of his appeal with the CA,” the ruling stated.
The same ruling said its previous decision downgrading Bayron’s liability to “simple dishonesty” and reducing its penalty from permanent dismissal to a three-month suspension was “vacated and set aside for having been rendered witho
In effect, the 15 December 2016 decision of the Ombudsman was restored, to wit: “There was substantial evidence to hold respondent Lucilo Bayron administratively liable for serious dishonesty and grave misconduct and was meted the penalty of dismissal from public service together with the accessory penalties of forfeiture of retirement benefits, cancellation of eligibility, bar from taking the civil service examinations and perpetual disqualification from holding any public office.”jurisdiction.”
With these developments, Vice Mayor Luis Marcaida III will again assume the mayoralty post as soon as the DILG implements the Ombudsman’s order.