We join the growing clamor to disqualify Atty. Edna Herrera-Batacan in her bid to become the next Ombudsman.
As the office entrusted by the people to investigate and prosecute government official accused of wrongdoings, especially graft and corruption, the Ombudsman post must be a paragon of probity, honesty, and ethical conduct.
Article XI, Section 8 of the Constitution specifies that “The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall be…of recognized probity and independence…”
Atty. Batacan does not fit the description.
By her own admission, she had been a party to a payoff, and had been accused of keeping an amount supposed to have been used as bribe money. What we have on record, instead of known probity as required by the Constitution, is an admission of criminal liability.
The consequences to good governance and to the people are dire if we will have an Ombudsman who cannot be trusted.
**
Nakikiisa tayo sa papalakas na panawagan para i-disqualify si Atty. Edna Herrera-Batacan sa kanyang hangad na maging susunod na Ombudsman.
Kailangan ang Ombudsman, huwaran sa katapatan dahil ang tanggapan niya ay pinagkakatiwalaan ng tao para imbestigahan at usigin ang mga kawani ng gobyerno na akusadong gumawa ng pagkakasala, lalo na ang pangangamkam ng pera ng bayan at katiwalian.
Tinutukoy ito ng ating Saligang Batas sa Article XI, Section 8, “The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall be…of recognized probity and independence…”
Hindi si Atty. Batacan ito. Sa kanya na ring pag-amin, naging kasabwat siya sa bayaran, at inakusahan na tumanggap ng halagang ginamit umano bilang suhol. Ang meron tayo, imbes na isang taong may prinsipyo tulad ng ni-re-require ng Saligang Batas, ay taong umamin sa krimen.
Hindi mabuti sa maayos na pamamahala at sa taumbayan kung mayroon tayong Ombudsman na hindi mapagkakatiwalaan.