Sie sind auf Seite 1von 24

HISTORY OF OMBUDSMAN

Origins
The OMBUDSMAN is a time-tested institution which evolved in the Scandinavian
countries. It was aimed at giving the common people a tribunal to which they can readily
ventilate their grievances against the government. King Charles XII of Sweden is generally
credited with initiating the office of the ombudsman. An official with the title of Hogsta
Ombudsman (Supreme Royal Ombudsman) was appointed in 1713. He was assigned to
“keep an eye on royal officials” and supervise observance of the laws. Sometimes he was
even commissioned to represent the king in some official functions. Introduced in the
Constitution of 1809, an Ombudsman was appointed by Swedish Parliament, making the
office independent from the King. Ombudsman comes from the Norwegian word
Umbodhsmadhr, meaning Administration Man or King’s Representative. As a Swedish word,
it literally means one who represents another.
The Dictionary generally defines Ombudsman as a government official who
investigates complaints against the government or its functionaries. On the basis of his
functions, the Ombudsman has also been described as a public defender, a grievance man,
a watchman over the law’s watchmen, voice of the citizen, and citizen’s counselor.
Essentially, the Ombudsman protects citizens against injustices committed by civil officials.
THE PERMANENT COMMISSION
In the Philippines, the Permanent Commission in the Revolutionary Government may
be considered a precursor of the present Office of the Ombudsman. Article 21 of the Decree
of June 23, 1898 creating the Revolutionary Government of the Philippines provided for a
Permanent Commission, presided over by the Vice President, that shall decide on appeal all
criminal cases decided by provincial councils. These cases were those filed against
Department Secretaries and provincial and municipal officials.
The Permanent Commission continued its existence after the ratification of the Constitution
of 1899, popularly known as the Malolos Constitution. Under No. 1, Article 55 of said
Constitution, one of the powers of the Commission was to “declare if there is sufficient cause
to proceed against the President of the Republic, the Representatives, Department
Secretaries, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the Solicitor General in the cases
provided by the Constitution.

IN PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS
Succeeding administrations likewise provided for the creation of agencies to handle
cases of corruption in the government service. An Integrity Board was created by President
Quirino in 1950. President Magsaysay immediately upon assumption to office created the
Presidential Complaints and Action Commission in 1957. President Garcia created the
Presidential Committee on Administration Performance Efficiency in 1958 and President
Macapagal created a Presidential Anti-Graft Committee in 1962. President Marcos in 1966
created a Presidential Agency on Reforms and Government Operations.
In 1969, the Office of the Citizen’s Counselor was created by Republic Act No. 6028.
However, like the previous agencies created by past administrations, the functions of the
Citizen’s counselor were mainly to conduct fact-finding investigations and to make
recommendations to Congress and the President. Moreover, RA No. 6028 was not at all
implemented. Subsequently, President Marcos created a Complaints and Investigation
Office in 1970 and the Presidential Administrative Assistance Committee in the following
year.

THE TANODBAYAN
The 1973 Constitution (Sections 5 and 6, Article XIII) provided for the establishment
of a special court known as the Sandiganbayan and an Office of the Ombudsman known as
the Tanodbayan. Presidential Decree Nos. 1486 and 1487 created the Sandiganbayan and
Tanodbayan, respectively, on June 11, 1978. Subsequent amendments were made to both
decrees.
The Tanodbayan shall receive and investigate complaints relative to public office,
including those in government-owned or controlled corporations, make appropriate
recommendations, and in appropriate cases, file and prosecute criminal, civil or
administrative cases before the proper court or body. On the other hand, the Sandiganbayan
shall have jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases involving graft and corrupt practices and
such other offenses committed by public officers and employees, including those in
government-owned or controlled corporations.

AT PRESENT
The framers of the 1987 Constitution envisioned the Ombudsman as an official critic
who studies the laws, procedures and practices in government, a mobilizer who ensures that
the steady flow of services is accorded the citizen and a watchdog who looks at the general
and specific performance of all government officials and employees. To further strengthen
and insulate the Office of the Ombudsman from politics and pressure forces, the Constitution
made it a fiscally autonomous body, (cf. Sec. 14, Art. XI, 1987 Constitution) independent
from any other branch of government, and headed by an Ombudsman with a fixed term of
seven years, who could be removed from office only by way of impeachment. (cf. Sec. 2, Art.
XI, 1987 Constitution). The Ombudsman and his Deputies enjoy the rank of Chairman and
members, respectively, of a Constitutional Commission whose appointments require no
Congressional confirmation. (cf. Sec. 9 and 10, Art. XI, 1987 Constitution).
The clear intent is to give full and unimpeded play to the exercise by said Office of its
extraordinary range of oversight and investigative authority over the actions of all public
officials and employees, offices and agencies. Not only can it investigate on its own or on
complaint any official act or omission that appears to be illegal, unjust, improper or
inefficient; it can prod officials into performing or expediting any act or duty required by law;
stop, prevent and control any abuse or impropriety in the performance of such duties; require
the submission of documents relative to contracts, disbursements, and financial transactions
of government officials for the purpose of ferreting out any irregularities therein. (cf. Sec. 13,
Art. XI, 1987 Constitution). The conferment of this extensive authority is prefaced in the
Constitution with the bestowal upon the Ombudsman and his deputies of the appealing title
of “Protectors of the People” (cf. Sec. 12, Art. XI).
On July 24, 1987, Executive Order No. 243 was issued by President Corazon C.
Aquino declaring the effectively of the creation of the Office and restating its composition,
powers and functions. On May 12, 1988, the Office of the Ombudsman became operational
upon the appointment of the Ombudsman and his Overall Deputy Ombudsman. Immediately
thereafter, one Deputy Ombudsman each for Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao were likewise
appointed by the President. This date became the basis for celebrating the anniversary of
the Office of the Ombudsman.
The Congress enacted on November 17, 1989 Republic Act No. 6770, otherwise known as
the Ombudsman Act of 1989, providing for the functional and structural organization of the
Office of the Ombudsman and delineating its powers functions and duties. Indeed,
Congress, in enacting Republic Act 6770, sought to have an Ombudsman who would be an
effective and an activist watchman vesting the Ombudsman with adequate authority that
would prevent the Ombudsman from being a “toothless tiger”. (cf. Journal, Session No. 15,
August 17, 1988)
Mission

As protectors of the people, we shall endeavour, in cooperation with all sectors of the
Filipino society to promote integrity and efficiency and high ethical standards in public
service through proactive approaches in graft prevention and public assistance, prompt
investigation of complaints and aggressive prosecution of cases filed against erring public
officials and employees.
Vision
A truly independent office run by God-fearing men and women with the highest
degree of competence, honesty and integrity and effectively serving as watchdog, mobilize,
official critic and dispenser of justice for the people it is constitutionally mandated to protect.
Quality Policy
The Office of the Ombudsman is committed to integrity and excellence in the
discharge of its mandate, serving with the highest standards of quality and efficiency by
exceeding client expectations and always improving its quality management system
compliant with global standards, for the benefit of the Filipino people.

THE SEAL

ASSISTANCE TO THE PUBLIC

The shield, balance, and dagger signify the assistance which the
Ombudsman should provide the public proactively (dagger) as the protector of the
people (shield) in a just and sincere manner (balance).

FIGHT AGAINST GRAFT AND CORRUPTION


The same shield, balance, and dagger signify the fight against graft and
corruption. The shield containing the elements of the Philippine flag signifies the
Office as the protector of the people against unscrupulous civil servants. The balance
represents fairness and justness in handling of complaints against erring civil
servants. The same balance symbolizes the fight against graft and corruption through
the balanced use of both the confrontational (investigation and prosecution) and
psychological (corruption prevention) approaches. The dagger affirms the punitive
measures the Office can impose upon those civil servants found to have committed
unscrupulous acts.

PROMOTION OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY AND NORMS OF CONDUCT OF


PUBLIC OFFICERS
The laurels speak of honour and distinction for the Office to serve as a model
in promoting the highest standards of ethics in the entire government bureaucracy.
The first branch with seven laurel leaves in particular represents the promotion of the policy
that public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must at all times be
accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and
efficiency, act with patriotism and justice and lead modest lives (cf. Article XI, Section 1,
1987 Constitution).
The other branch with seven laurel leaves represents the promotion by the Office of the
norms of conduct of public officials and employees pursuant to Section 4 of Republic Act No.
6713, namely, commitment to public interest, professionalism, justness and sincerity,
political neutrality, responsiveness to the public, nationalism and patriotism, commitment to
democracy, and simple living.
The branches and leaves and its green colour in general represent hope and national
progress resulting from the efforts of the Office to promote public accountability and the
norms of conduct of public officers beginning with the youth. These branches and leaves
shall also reflect the concerted and united efforts of communities as inspired by the Office
towards the inculcation of public accountability and values that shall lead to a graft-free
society.

AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE FUNCTIONAL AND STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION OF


THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

(Republic Act. 6770)

Section 4 Appointment — The Ombudsman and his Deputies, including the Special
Prosecutor, shall be appointed by the President from a list of at least twenty-one (21)
nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council, and from a list of three (3) nominees for
each vacancy thereafter, which shall be filled within three (3) months after it occurs, each of
which list shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation. In the organization of the
Office of the Ombudsman for filling up of positions therein, regional, cultural or ethnic
considerations shall be taken into account to the end that the Office shall be as much as
possible representative of the regional, ethnic and cultural make-up of the Filipino nation.

Section 5 Qualifications — The Ombudsman and his Deputies, including the Special
Prosecutor, shall be natural-born citizens of the Philippines, at least forty (40) years old, of
recognized probity and independence, members of the Philippine Bar, and must not have
been candidates for any elective national or local office in the immediately preceding election
whether regular or special. The Ombudsman must have, for ten (10) years or more, been a
judge or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.

Section 7 Terms of Office

The Ombudsman and his Deputies, including the Special Prosecutor, shall serve for a term
of seven (7) years without reappointment.
Section 8 Removal; Filling of Vacancy

1. In accordance with the provisions of Article XI of the Constitution, the Ombudsman


may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable
violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes,
or betrayal of public trust.
2. A Deputy, or the Special Prosecutor, may be removed from office by the President
for any of the grounds provided for the removal of the Ombudsman, and after due
process.
3. In case of vacancy in the Office of the Ombudsman due to death, resignation,
removal or permanent disability of the incumbent Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy
shall serve as Acting Ombudsman in a concurrent capacity until a new Ombudsman
shall have been appointed for a full term. In case the Overall Deputy cannot assume
the role of Acting Ombudsman, the President may designate any of the Deputies, or
the Special Prosecutor, as Acting Ombudsman.
4. In case of temporary absence or disability of the Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy
shall perform the duties of the Ombudsman until the Ombudsman returns or is able
to perform his duties.

Section 10 Disclosure of Relationship

It shall be the duty of the Ombudsman, his Deputies, including the Special Prosecutor to
make under oath, to the best of their knowledge and/or information, a public disclosure of the
identities of, and their relationship with the persons referred to in the preceding section.

Section 15 Powers, Functions and Duties

The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the following powers, functions and duties:

1. Investigate and prosecute on its own or on complaint by any person, any act or
omission of any public officer or employee, office or agency, when such act or
omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient. It has primary
jurisdiction over cases cognizable by the Sandiganbayan and, in the exercise of his
primary jurisdiction, it may take over, at any stage, from any investigatory agency of
Government, the investigation of such cases;
2. Direct, upon complaint or at its own instance, any officer or employee of the
Government, or of any subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof, as well as any
government-owned or controlled corporations with original charter, to perform and
expedite any act or duty required by law, or to stop, prevent, and correct any abuse
or impropriety in the performance of duties;
3. Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action against a public officer or
employee at fault or who neglect to perform an act or discharge a duty required by
law, and recommend his removal, suspension, demotion, fine, censure, or
prosecution, and ensure compliance therewith; or enforce its disciplinary authority as
provided in Section 21 of this Act: Provided, That the refusal by any officer without
just cause to comply with an order of the Ombudsman to remove, suspend, demote,
fine, censure, or prosecute an officer or employee who is at fault or who neglects to
perform an act or discharge a duty required by law shall be a ground for disciplinary
action against said officer;
4. Direct the officer concerned, in any appropriate case, and subject to such limitations
as it may provide in its rules of procedure, to furnish it with copies of documents
relating to contracts or transactions entered into by his office involving the
disbursement or use of public funds or properties, and report any irregularity to the
Commission on Audit for appropriate action;
5. Request any government agency for assistance and information necessary in the
discharge of its responsibilities, and to examine, if necessary, pertinent records and
documents;
6. Publicize matters covered by its investigation of the matters mentioned in paragraphs
(1), (2), (3) and (4) hereof, when circumstances so warrant and with due prudence:
Provided, That the Ombudsman under its rules and regulations may determine what
cases may not be made public: Provided, further, That any publicity issued by the
Ombudsman shall be balanced, fair and true;
7. Determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, mismanagement, fraud, and
corruption in the Government, and make recommendations for their elimination and
the observance of high standards of ethics and efficiency;
8. Administer oaths, issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum, and take testimony in
any investigation or inquiry, including the power to examine and have access to bank
accounts and records;
9. Punish for contempt in accordance with the Rules of Court and under the same
procedure and with the same penalties provided therein;
10. Delegate to the Deputies, or its investigators or representatives such authority or duty
as shall ensure the effective exercise or performance of the powers, functions, and
duties herein or hereinafter provided;
11. Investigate and initiate the proper action for the recovery of ill-gotten and/or
unexplained wealth amassed after February 25, 1986 and the prosecution of the
parties involved therein. The Ombudsman shall give priority to complaints filed
against high ranking government officials and/or those occupying supervisory
positions, complaints involving grave offenses as well as complaints involving large
sums of money and/or properties.

Administrative Order No. 07

RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN

Rule II

PROCEDURE IN CRIMINAL CASES

Section 2 Evaluation

Upon evaluating the complaint, the investigating officer shall recommend whether it
may be:

a) Dismissed outright for want of palpable merit;

b) Referred to respondent for comment;

c) Indorsed to the proper government office or agency which has jurisdiction


over the case.

d) Forwarded to the appropriate office or official for fact-finding investigation;

e) Referred for administrative adjudication; or

f) Subjected to a preliminary investigation.

Section 3 Preliminary investigation

Preliminary Investigation may be conducted by any of the following:

1) Ombudsman Investigators;

2) Special Prosecuting Officers;

3) Deputized Prosecutors;

4) Investigating Officials authorized by law to conduct preliminary


investigations or
5) Lawyers in the government service, so designated by the Ombudsman.

Section 4 Procedure

The preliminary investigation of cases falling under the jurisdiction of the


Sandiganbayan and Regional Trial Courts shall be conducted in the manner prescribed in
Section 3, Rule 112 of the Rules of Court, subject to the following provisions:

a) If the complaint is not under oath or is based only on official reports, the
investigating officer shall require the complainant or supporting witnesses to execute
affidavits to substantiate the complaints.

b) After such affidavits have been secured, the investigating officer shall issue
an order, attaching thereto a copy of the affidavits and other supporting documents,
directing the respondents to submit, within ten (10) days from receipt thereof, his
counter-affidavits and controverting evidence with proof of service thereof on the
complainant. The complainant may file reply affidavits within ten (10) days after
service of the counter affidavits.

c) If the respondent does not file a counter-affidavit, the investigating officer


may consider the comment filed by him, if any, as his answer to the complaint. In any
event, the respondent shall have access to the evidence on record.

d) No motion to dismiss shall be allowed except for lack of jurisdiction. Neither


may a motion for a bill of particulars be entertained. If respondents desires any
matter in the complainant's affidavit to be clarified, the particularization thereof may
be done at the time of clarificatory questioning in the manner provided in paragraph
(f) of this section.

e) If the respondents cannot be served with the order mentioned in paragraph


6 hereof, or having been served, does not comply therewith, the complaint shall be
deemed submitted for resolution on the basis of the evidence on the record.

f) If, after the filing of the requisite affidavits and their supporting evidences,
there are facts material to the case which the investigating officer may need to be
clarified on, he may conduct a clarificatory hearing during which the parties shall be
afforded the opportunity to be present but without the right to examine or cross-
examine the witness being questioned. Where the appearance of the parties or
witnesses is impracticable, the clarificatory questioning may be conducted in writing,
whereby the questions desired to be asked by the investigating officer or a party shall
be reduced into writing and served on the witness concerned who shall be required
to answer the same in writing and under oath.

g) Upon the termination of the preliminary investigation, the investigating


officer shall forward the records of the case together with his resolution to the
designated authorities for their appropriate action thereon.

Section 7 Motion for reconsideration

a) Only one motion for reconsideration or reinvestigation of an approved order or


resolution shall be allowed, the same to be filled within five (5) days from notice thereof with
the Office of the Ombudsman, or the proper Deputy Ombudsman as the case may be, with
corresponding leave of court in cases where information has already been filed in court;

b) The filing of a motion for reconsideration/reinvestigation shall not bar the filing of
the corresponding information in Court on the basis of the finding of probable cause in the
resolution subject of the motion. (As amended by Administrative Order No. 15, dated
February 16, 2000)

CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES INSULATING THE OFFICE FROM POLITICAL


INFLUENCE AND INTERFERENCE

The organic provisions finally approved insulated the Office from political influence or
interference by:

 giving the Ombudsman and his Deputies, whose appointments need no


Congressional confirmation, the rank of chairman and members, respectively,
of a Constitutional Commission;
 prescribing for them fixed term of Office during which their salaries cannot be
diminished;
 removable from Office only by impeachment; and,
 making it an independent office enjoying fiscal autonomy.
Present Ombudsman
SAMUEL R. MARTIRES

Samuel Reyes Martires, the sixth


Ombudsman of the Republic of the
Philippines, had priestly aspirations. But fate
intervened he went on to become a lawyer
and more importantly to tread a remarkable
journey in public service.
The significance of this interesting
twist in his professional career is not lost on
him. “I am the first lawyer in the family. Everyone was happy when I passed the bar. I did not
take it against anyone (who believed otherwise),” he reveals in Benchmark, the official
quarterly magazine of the Supreme Court Public Information Office. In this interview, Justice
Martires shared that, except for his mother, the idea of having a career in the legal
profession, and more so in the judiciary, was far removed from the minds of the people who
knew him. But he surprised them all.
After receiving his Bachelor of Arts degree from the Manuel L. Quezon University in
1971, this son of Palapag, Northern Samar took up law at San Beda College of Law. Imbued
by the school’s motto of ora et labora(prayer and hard work), he earned his Bachelor of
Laws degree in 1975. In 1976, he passed the Bar Examinations.
Public service is wired in the DNA of Ombudsman Martires. Right after passing the bar, he
worked as Legal Officer 2 at the Department of Public Works, Transportation and
Communication until 1979. From 1979 to 1984, he served as Assistant Department Manager
at the Ministry of Human Settlements. He went on hiatus from government service when he
engaged in private practice from 1987 to 2000.
Upon the prodding of his mother to take on a position in the judiciary, he decided to go back
and serve in government. By virtue of hard work and discipline, he went on to carve a
checkered career in the judiciary. In July 2000, he was appointed as the Presiding Judge of
Regional Trial Court, Branch 32 of Agoo, La Union. Within five years, or in 2005, he was
appointed as the 49th Justice of the Sandiganbayan where he served for almost a decade.
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.
PREVIOUS OMBUDSMEN/WOMEN

CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES MA. MERCEDITAS NAVARRO-GUTIERREZ


December 2005 to May 6, 2011 July 26, 2011 to July 26, 2018

SIMEON V. MARCELO ANIANO A. DESIERTO


1995-2002 2002 – November 30, 2005

CONRADO M. VASQUEZ
1988-1995

OMDUSMAN/SUBORDINATES

NAME POSITION
SAMUEL MARTIRES TANODBAYAN(OMBUDSMAN)
MELCHOR A. CARANDANG OVER DEPUTY OMBUDSMAN
GERAD A. MOSQUERA DEPUTY OF OMBUDSMAN FOR LUZON
PAUL ELMER M. CLEMENTE DEPUTY OMBSMAN FOR VISAYA
RODOLF M. ELMAN DEPUTY OF OMDUSMAN FOR MINDANAO
CYRIL E. RAMOS DEPUTY OF OMBUDSMAN FOR MILITARY
AND POLICE
EDILBERTO G. SANDOVAL SPECIAL PROSECUTOR
TRUNKLINE (02) 479-7300, (02) 317-8300

Hon. Samuel R. Martires Ombudsman


Loc. 1509/1517

Hon. Edilberto G. Sandoval Special Prosecutor/


Loc. 3460 Acting Overall Deputy Ombudsman

Hon. Adoracion A. Agbada Officer-in-Charge, Ombudsman for Luzon


Loc. 4349

Hon. Paul Elmer M. Clemente Deputy Ombudsman for Visayas


Loc. 6601

Hon. Rodolfo M. Elman Deputy Ombudsman for Mindanao


Loc. 8804

Hon. Cyril E. Ramos Deputy Ombudsman for the Military


Loc. 5309 and Other Law Enforcement Offices
(MOLEO)
Atty. Kristine Joy Meñez- Assistant Ombudsman
Macalalad Ombudsman Proper
Loc. 1509

Atty. Jose M. Balmeo, Jr. Assistant Ombudsman


Ombudsman Proper

Atty. Pilarita T. Lapitan Assistant Ombudsman


Ombudsman Proper

Atty. Asryman T. Rafanan Assistant Ombudsman


Loc. 1521 Office of Legal Affairs

Atty. Caesar D. Asuncion Assistant Ombudsman


Loc. 1413 Field Investigation Office I

Atty. Joselito P. Fangon Assistant Ombudsman


Loc. 1436 Field Investigation Office II

Atty. Aleu A. Amante Assistant Ombudsman


Loc. 1309 Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Monitoring Office I

Atty. Marilou A. Mejica Assistant Ombudsman


Loc. 1318 Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Monitoring Office II
Atty. Weomark Ryan G. Assistant Ombudsman
Layson Finance and Management Information
Loc. 1227 Office

Atty. Leilanie Bernadette C. Assistant Ombudsman


Cabras General Administration Office
Loc. 1226

Atty. Maribeth T. Padios Assistant Ombudsman


Loc. 1324 Prosecution, Information, Evaluation
and Monitoring Services

Acting Assistant Ombudsman


Atty. Mary Susan S. Guillermo
Public Assistance and Corruption
(02) 951-3149
Prevention Office

Atty. Adoracion A. Agbada Acting Assistant Ombudsman


Loc. 4349 Luzon

Atty. Carla Juris Narvios- Assistant Ombudsman


Tanco Visayas
(032) 254-8207

Atty. Maria Iluminada Lapid- Assistant Ombudsman


Viva Mindanao
(082) 221-3431 Loc. 2401
Atty. Dennis L. Garcia Acting Assistant Ombudsman
Loc. 5308/5309 MOLEO

Atty. Cornelio L. Somido Deputy Special Prosecutor


Loc. 3406

Atty. Manuel T. Soriano, Jr. Deputy Special Prosecutor


Loc. 3405

Atty. Omar L. Sagadal Deputy Special Prosecutor


Loc. 3433

Atty. Lalaine D. Benitez Acting Deputy Special Prosecutor


(02) 951-3119

Atty. Irenio M. Paldeng


Acting Deputy Special Prosecutor
Loc. 3408

TRUNKLINE (02) 479-7300

CENTRAL

Atty. James G. Viernes Director IV


Loc. 1538 Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudicationand Review Bureau
Atty. Emma B. Suarez Director IV
Loc. 1302 Prosecution and Monitoring Bureau

Atty. Beda A. Epres Director IV


General Investigation Bureau – A

Atty. Maria Olivia Elena A.


Director IV
Roxas
General Investigation Bureau – B
Loc. 1416

Atty. Maria Janina J. Hidalgo Director IV


Loc. 1433 General Investigation Bureau – C

Atty. Ferdinand Q. San Director IV


Joaquin General Investigation Bureau – D
Loc. 1412

Atty. Francisca M. Serfino Director


Loc. 1442 General Investigation Bureau – E

Atty. Ryan P. Medrano Director


General Investigation Bureau – F

Atty. Medwin S. Dizon Director


Loc. 1308 Preliminary Investigation and
Administrative
Adjudication Bureau- A
Atty. Moreno F. Generoso Director
Loc. 1337/1339 Preliminary Investigation and
Administrative
Adjudication Bureau – B

Atty. Maricel M. Marcial- Acting Director


Oquendo Preliminary Investigation and
Loc. 1310 Administrative
Adjudication Bureau – C

Atty. Nellie B. Golez Director


Loc. 1328 Preliminary Investigation and
Administrative
Adjudication Bureau – D

Atty. Anna Isabel G. Aurellano Acting Director


Loc. 1332 Preliminary Investigation and
Administrative
Adjudication Bureau – E

Atty. Ruth Laura A. Mella Acting Director


Loc. 1323 Preliminary Investigation and
Administrative
Adjudication Bureau – F

Atty. Julita M. Calderon Acting Director


Loc. 2101 Public Assistance Bureau
Atty. Mary Rawnsle V. Lopez Acting Director
Loc. 2122 Public Information and Media Relations
Bureau

Atty. Hilario A. Favila, Jr. Acting Director


Loc. 2110 Bureau of Resident Ombudsman

Atty. Rhodora F. Galicia Officer-in-Charge


Loc. 2131 Community Coordination Bureau

Ms. Lourdes P. Salazar Director


Loc. 1530 National Integrity Center

Atty. Mothalib C. Onos Acting Director


Research and Special Studies Bureau

Mr. Dennis Russell D. Baldago Director IV


Loc. 1501 Project Management Bureau

Mr. Edgardo C. Diansuy Director IV


Loc. 1229 Finance and Management Information
Office

Ms. Adorie T. Cornito Acting Director II


Loc. 1104 Finance & Management Service

Ms. Gina Lyn C. Lucas Director IV


Loc. 1209 Management Information System Service
Mr. Emmanuel O. Vergara Director IV
Loc. 2227 Central Administrative Service

TRUNKLINE (02) 479-7300

LUZON

Atty. Adoracion A. Agbada Acting Assistant Ombudsman/ Director


Loc. 4349 Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – B

Atty. Joaquin F. Salazar Director


Loc. 4338 Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – A

Atty. Margie G. Fernandez- Director


Calpatura Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – C

Atty. Gil Felix A. Hidalgo Director


Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – D

Atty. Raquel Rosario M. Director


Cunanan-Marayag Public Assistance and Corruption
Loc. 4330 Prevention Bureau
Atty. Maria Melinda S. Director
Mananghaya-Henson Field Investigation Bureau

Atty. Expedito O. Allado, Jr. Officer-in-Charge/ Acting Director


Case Records Evaluation, Monitoring
and Enforcement Bureau

Atty. Floriza A. Briones Director IV


Finance and Administrative Bureau

TRUNKLINE (032)412-1624, (032)255-0977,(032)412-5342

(032)412-5440, (032)412-1635,(032)412-1636

VISAYAS

Atty. Euphemia B. Bacalso Director


Loc. 106 Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – A

Atty. Jane Aguilar Acting Director


Loc. 320 Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – B

Atty. Gaudioso J. Melendez Director


Loc. 207 Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – C

Atty. Philip C. Camiguing Acting Director


Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – D

Director
Atty. Pio R. Dargantes
Regional Office VI (Iloilo)

Atty. Eduardo B. Kangleon Acting Director


Public Assistance and Corruption
Prevention Bureau

Atty. Alfred Yann G. Oguis Director


Loc. 101 Regional Office VIII (Tacloban)/
Acting Director
Field Investigation Bureau

Atty. Sarah Jo A. Vergara Acting Director


Loc. 105/6603 Case Records Evaluation, Monitoring
and Enforcement Bureau

Atty. Imelda Marie B. Beltran Acting Director


Loc. 103/6602 Finance and Administrative Bureau
TRUNKLINE (082) 221-3431 TO 33

MINDANAO

Atty. Gay Maggie B. Violan Officer-in-Charge


Loc. 1101 Public Assistance and Corruption
Prevention Bureau

Atty. Hilde C. Likit Officer-in-Charge


Loc. 3101 Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – A

Atty. Marco Anacleto P. Buena Acting Director


Loc. 3201 Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – B

Atty. Marie Josephine B. de Acting Director IV


Vera Preliminary Investigation, Administrative
Loc. 3401 Adjudication and Prosecution Bureau – D

Atty. Samuel P. Naungayan Officer-in-Charge


Loc. 1201 Case Records Evaluation, Monitoring
and Enforcement Bureau
Bibliography:
Administrative order no. 07 “Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman.”
Republic Act 6770. “An act providing for the functional and structural organization of the
office of the ombudsman, and for other purposes.“
Office of the Ombudsman, Ombudsman’s Journal Anniversary Issue, Vol. 1, No. 1, May 9,
1996
https://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/about-us/powers-functions-and-duties/
Office of the Tanodbayan “Primer on the Tanodbayan” September 21, 1980
http://www.ombudsmanassociation.org/young-people/all-about-omb.htm
https://www.lawphil.net/statutes/presdecs/pd1978/pd_1607_1978.html
https://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1989/ra_6770_1989a.html