Over the last few days, criticisms against me again flew fast and thick. I have learned to ignore many of them, accepting the advice of friends that criticisms, including those that are utter nonsense, are part and parcel of the life of one in a high position of authority.
Still, as I said only recently, I am only human and I feel hurt sometimes, especially when my own family are affected by the endless criticisms.
In our society who is immune to criticism? Even cardinals and bishops are subjected to public excoriation. Respect in our society is at an all-time low. The highest official of the land himself, the President of the Republic, is criticized all the time.
Sometimes the criticisms amount to personal insults that have nothing to do with one’s performance of official duty.
You do what you sincerely think is right and still the criticisms come. It makes you wonder just what you really must do to stave off criticisms. But of course I will not do them if they are only practical, not ethical.
Some people of course are seemingly programmed to always, always criticize. They would get sick if they do not start something that foments trouble.
The criticisms against me of late are all recycled criticisms. They were used to no avail before, such as in the failed impeachment case filed against me last year.
Among these stale criticisms is that I am an appointee of former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and schoolmate of the former First Gentleman, and therefore am not capable of unbiased judgment in a case involving them.
To what extent is this criticism a mere projection of my critics’ own weakness and susceptibility to bias?
In response to these recycled criticisms, I could only hold a press conference and then answer a few questions from the media. And here is what I want to stress to you, my readers, now-
In the discharge of our official functions, we adhere to the Rule of Law and the Constitution. In deciding cases or in filing them, we rely solely on the evidence presented to or uncovered by our investigators.
Like many Constitutional officials, the Ombudsman has a fixed term and can be removed only by impeachment. The Constitution enumerates the specific grounds for impeachment. Alleged closeness to the appointing authority is not one of them.
If the mere fact of being appointed to a high office creates a bias in favor of the appointing authority, then no Justice of the Supreme Court can ever be trusted to render a fair decision in a case where the appointing authority is involved.
I fully support the creation of the Truth Commission. The Commission and we in the Office of the Ombudsman share the same objective – that of finding the truth. If it uncovers evidence withheld from us, we most welcome it.
I have full faith in the competence, integrity and independence of former Chief Justice Hilario Davide. I am confident that under his leadership the Commission will act only on the bases of law and admissible evidence, and observe due process. If the Commission ever needs the assistance of my office, we will extend our full cooperation.
It is my hope that some quarters stop pre-judging what former Chief Justice Davide would do or would not do regarding accusations leveled against former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, just because he was appointed by the latter as Philippine Representative to the United Nations.
It is my hope as well that some quarters stop pre-judging me on the basis only of the fact that I too was appointed to the position of Ombudsman by the former President. ◙
Original published in the July 16, 2010 issue of Business Mirror.
