Martires vows to jail those who comment on SALNs photo from OneNews.PH
Government

Martires vows to jail those who comment on SALNs

Sep 11, 2021, 8:26 AM
Rose De La Cruz

Rose De La Cruz

Writer/Columnist

By seeking to jail for five years those who will make “commentaries” on SALNs, Ombudsman Samuel Martires is further alienating himself and his office and those of the President, VP and other higher authorities from the people. He has surely empowered himself to restrict the flow of information through SALNs, which he accused media has ‘weaponized.”

The pronouncement of Ombudsman (Tanodbayan ng Pilipinas) Samuel Martires on September 9 seeking five-year jail term for those who make ‘commentaries’ on SALNs (statement of assets, liabilities and networth) of public officials sends chills down my spine.

He issued this pronouncement months after he tightened the noose on those wanting to obtain copies of public officials’ SALNs—virtually impinging on the free flow of information and making a mockery of the Freedom of Information Act, which his appointing authority, President Duterte, signed earlier on.

With these separate issuances, Martires has virtually made his office the final clearing house for all SALNs, a document required for all civil servants (high or low) and only by his approval can such be released to the requesting party, especially not to media. His reason is that media has “weaponized” the SALNs in hitting at those in government.

As defined, the function of the Ombudsman, aka Tanodbayan ng Pilipinas (in Filipino), is to be responsible for investigating and prosecuting Philippine government officials accused of crimes, especially graft and corruption. One way of knowing any illegal accumulation of wealth (through graft and corruption) is through the SALN, which he is restricting from the public.

Amending R,A. 6713

Martires pushed for this amendment to Republic Act No. 6713, or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, during the House appropriations committee hearing on the Office of the Ombudsman's 2022 budget on Thursday, September 9.

"What I'm proposing is to make stringent penalties that anyone who makes a comment on SALN of a particular government official or employee must likewise be liable for at least an imprisonment of not less than five years, no more no less," Martires told lawmakers.

Martires has maintained a policy to restrict public access to SALNs, believing that it has been weaponized particularly by the media, and "can destroy the reputation" of an official.

He reported how media supposedly unfairly reported his 2018 SALN that showed a one-year wealth increase of P15 million. An examination of the pertinent dates would show that the P15-million jump happened within five months, or from August to December 2018, Rappler said.

The Ombudsman said the reports made it appear that he earned that much from his government post in just five months.

"Even under the existing provisions of [RA] 6713, they're not allowed to make any comment. This is what media does not know," said Martires.
"I do not know if they understand English also. I am sorry to say this, but the provisions of 6713 is very clear. Napaka-liwanag (It's very clear), only for publication, walang komentaryo (no commentary) – that's the transparency," said Martires.

What constitutes commentary

Section 8(C)(4) of RA 6713, which governs the filing of SALNs, says "any statement filed under this Act shall be available to the public for a period of ten (10) years after receipt of the statement."

Section 8(D)(b) says: "It shall be unlawful for any person to obtain or use any statement filed under this Act for any commercial purpose other than by news and communications media for dissemination to the general public."

Does reporting on the content make it a commentary? And even if it's an opinion piece, would punishing one who makes a commentary go against the constitutional right of free speech?

"Hindi po ba napaka-dangerous noon na i-penalize natin ang ating mga mamamayan kung nagtatanong sila, kasi guaranteed sa ating Constitution ang freedom of expression," said Bayan Muna Representative Carlos Zarate.

Protecting Duterte

Amid a general clamor for the President to release his SALN in September 2020, Martires asked “why are we so interested in Duterte’s SALN?” In issuing Memorandum Circular No. 1 restricting public access to SALNs of the President, VP and heads of constitutional commissions, Martires must have forgotten that a public office is a public trust and therefore people are entitled to know where and how their monies are being spent.

He obviously wants to protect the SALN of the President from public scrutiny—rather than fulfill his function as the public’s watchdog—because he owes his appointment as the 6th Ombudsman of the country with a 7-year term (which he will occupy until 2025, unless impeached by Congress). He replaced Conchita Carpio-Morales, now a staunch critic of the President.

"No matter how much criticism I will receive, even if I will be bashed, even if I will be removed from office.... I will not yield to public opinion," said Martires.

Martires added, saying that corruption is deeply rooted and endemic in many offices. Martires said he could guarantee that Duterte has been filing his SALNs as required.

In March 2017, Justice Martires took his oath as the 175th Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

In August 2018, six months before his compulsory retirement from the Supreme Court, he asked the Court’s approval for early retirement so that he could fulfill a lifelong dream: to serve and protect the Filipino people as Ombudsman of the Republic of the Philippines.

Tags: #Ombudsman, #accountability, #transparency, #SALN


We take a stand
OpinYon News logo

Designed and developed by Simmer Studios.

© 2024 OpinYon News. All rights reserved.