By Benjamin Cuaresma
MANILA — The Supreme Court has declared void former President Rodrigo Duterte’s 2018 dismissal of Overall Deputy Ombudsman Melchor Arthur Carandang, ruling that the chief executive has no administrative or disciplinary authority over a deputy ombudsman.
In a decision promulgated on January 29, 2026 and recently posted on its website, the High Court’s Third Division said Duterte’s order was unconstitutional as it undermined the independence of the Office of the Ombudsman.
Upholding its 2014 ruling in the Gonzales case, the SC reiterated that the president’s power to remove a deputy ombudsman “is unconstitutional, as it would undermine the office’s independence.”
“What the Office of the President now seeks is nothing less than a renewed attempt to secure reconsideration of the Second Gonzales decision,” Associate Justice Maria Filomena Singh wrote. “There is no compelling reason for such a drastic turn, all the more so when the president’s own conduct was in issue, underscoring the enduring need to shield the Office of the Ombudsman from shifting political influence.”
The Third Division nullified both Malacañang’s dismissal order and the June 14, 2019 decision of the Office of the Ombudsman declaring Carandang’s post vacant.
Carandang is entitled to:
Full retirement benefits until the expiration of his term in 2020
Back salaries covering the period of his preventive suspension and dismissal, up to the end of his term
Duterte dismissed Carandang in 2018, two years before his scheduled retirement.
The dismissal stemmed from administrative complaints filed by Presidential Anti-Corruption Commission member Manuelito Luna and lawyers Eligio Mallari, Jacinto Paras, and Glenn Chong. They accused Carandang of releasing to the media alleged bank records from the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) involving Duterte and his family.
The AMLC denied it was investigating Duterte or that it was the source of the documents. Carandang had initiated a probe in 2017 based on a complaint by then-Senator Antonio Trillanes IV alleging unexplained wealth.
Malacañang had cited the Agustin-Se case to justify its authority to dismiss Carandang, but the SC ruled that the case did not involve the issue of presidential administrative jurisdiction.
Associate Justices Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa, Henri Jean Paul Inting, Samuel Gaerlan, and Japar Dimaampao concurred.
The ruling marks another decision overturning a policy from the Duterte administration. The Court emphasized that allowing the president to discipline Ombudsman officials would compromise the constitutional independence of the anti-graft body.
Former Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales had earlier refused to implement Duterte’s 90-day suspension order against Carandang in 2017, citing the same Gonzales precedent.
ia/xf
