The Ombudsman for the Visayas has ordered the immediate dismissal from the service of lawyer Manuel Advincula, the Provincial Election Supervisor of Negros Oriental, after finding him guilty for Grave Misconduct during the May 2007 elections.
In a nine-page decision dated Aug. 26 but which was received by the parties only this week, Deputy Ombudsman for the Visayas Pelagio Apostol approved the findings and recommendations of Graft Investigator & Prosecution Officer Portia Pacquiao-Suson and Assistant Ombudsman Virginia Palanca-Santiago, and ordered the Commission on Elections to dismiss Advincula from the service with forfeiture of all benefits, perpetual disqualification to hold public office, and cancellation of all Civil Service eligibilities.
The case stemmed from the complaint filed by candidate Edgar Y. Teves, who claimed that Advincula demanded P300,000 on April 2, 2007, to settle a disqualification case filed against him by Edgar’s uncle Herminio G. Teves.
Court records showed that Teves made a down payment of P100,000 to a certain Jeremias Dagoy, upon Advincula’s instructions. Advincula later sent a text message on May 3, 2007 saying: “Gud am. Am leaving 4 mla 6may. D retainer fee is nw due.”
Teves and Advincula, however, had agreed that the balance will be paid upon Advincula’s return from Manila. On May 8, 2007, Advincula sent another text message to Teves: “Good am Congresssman. Am waiting 4 ur promised dlvry. ty.”
Teves then reported the matter to the National Bureau of Investigation, and informed Advincula that he will pay P50,000 on May 11.
At 7 a.m. of May 11, Teves, accompanied by an NBI agent, went to see Advincula in his office bringing a paper bag containing marked money.
“Mao na ni? (Is this it?),” Advincula asked upon seeing the bag. Teves asked Advincula to count the money but Advincula refused, saying it would look inappropriate because there was someone else in the room. At that point, NBI agents entered Advincula’s office and arrested him.
Advincula denied demanding money from Teves, branding the case as baseless, and adding that he does not have the authority to rule and decide on the disqualification case.
He also denied visiting Teves at his work place, and he also did not send any text message to Teves. He claimed that Teves could have sent those text messages himself to his own cellphone using another SIM card.
But the Ombudsman ruled that Teves had sufficiently substantiated his allegations against Advincula. “By using his official position in the COMELEC to convince complainant that he can facilitate a favorable ruling on complainant’s disqualification case for a price, Respondent has obtained financial benefits for himself in disregard of the prejudice he has caused to the complainant, to the image of his office, and the public service in general,” the Ombudsman said.