Frequently Asked Questions

The Revised Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman (Administrative Order [A.O.] No. 1, series of 2026) shall apply in initiating cases before the Office of the Ombudsman.

None. A complaint, grievance or request for assistance may be in any form, either verbal or in writing. For a speedier disposition, however, it is preferable that it be in writing and under oath. As much as practicable, the complaining or requesting party must indicate his/her address and contact details, including email address, if there be any, and that of each of the concerned parties. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule I, Sec. 3, 1st par.)

For a complaint to be docketed for criminal, administrative and forfeiture proceedings, it must be formalized in writing and under oath accompanied by affidavits of witnesses and other evidence in support of the charge. Such complaint shall be accompanied by a Certificate of Non-Forum Shopping duly subscribed and sworn to by the complainant or his/her counsel. The complaint shall be filed in two (2) originals and such number of copies as there are respondents whose respective full names, positions and addresses, including email addresses, if any, shall be indicated in the complaint. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VIII, Sec. 2)

Yes. However, a complaint which does not disclose the identity of the complainant will be acted upon only if, upon evaluation, it merits appropriate consideration or contains sufficient leads or particulars to enable the taking of further action. However, by opting to remain anonymous, the complainant shall not be notified of the action on the complaint. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule I, Sec. 3, 2nd par.)

Yes, the Ombudsman or the Deputy Ombudsman, on his own initiative, order the conduct of an investigation. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule IV, Sec. 1, 2nd par.)

A criminal complaint may be filed for acts or omissions penalized under Republic Act (R.A.) No. 3019, R.A. No. 6713, R.A. No. 7080, the Revised Penal Code and any other applicable penal laws (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule V, Sec. 1) committed by public officers/employees and their conspiring private individuals, if any.

Forfeiture proceedings under R.A. No.1379 in relation to R.A. No. 3019 and R.A. No. 6770 shall be initiated, in accordance with law, for the recovery of unlawfully acquired property, unexplained or ill-gotten wealth amassed after 25 February 1986. A property shall be presumed prima facie to have been unlawfully acquired whenever any public officer or employee has acquired during his/her incumbency an amount of property which is manifestly out of proportion to his/her salary as such public officer or employee and to his/her other lawful income and the income from legitimately acquired property. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VII, Secs. 1 & 2)

Yes, in cases of conspiracy between a public officer/employee and a private person, the Ombudsman has jurisdiction to include such private person in the investigation and proceed against such private person as the evidence may warrant. The public officer/employee and the private person shall be tried jointly and shall be subject to the same penalties and liabilities. (R.A. No. 6770, Sec. 22; A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule V, Sec. 2)

An administrative complaint against a public officer/employee may be filed for acts or omissions which are:

  1. Contrary to law or regulations;
  2. Unreasonable, unfair, oppressive or discriminatory;
  3. Inconsistent with the general course of an agency’s functions though in accordance with law;
  4. Based on a mistake of law or an arbitrary ascertainment of facts;
  5. In the exercise of discretionary powers but for an improper purpose;
  6. Otherwise irregular, immoral or devoid of justification;
  7. Due to any delay or refusal to comply with the referral or directive of the Ombudsman or a Deputy Ombudsman against the officer or employee to whom it was addressed; and
  8. Based on such other grounds provided under Executive Order No. 292 and other applicable laws. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VI, Sec. 1)

Yes, officials removable only by impeachment may be the subject of investigation for serious misconduct in office for the purpose of filing a verified complaint for impeachment, if warranted. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VI, Sec. 2)
When appropriate and pursuant to Section 22 of R.A. No. 6770, the investigator may recommend that the result of the investigation be referred to Congress for the purpose of filing a verified complaint for impeachment, if warranted. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule IV, Sec. 3, 2nd par.)

Upon evaluation to determine the proper course of action, a complaint may be

  1. Referred to:
    1. The concerned area or sectoral office of the Office of the Ombudsman;
    2. Another agency/office with exclusive jurisdiction over the person/subject matter;
    3. Other agencies/offices that have concurrent jurisdiction with the Office of the Ombudsman; or
    4. Other specialized agencies that have competence on the matter for their appropriate requisite action.
  2. Considered as a request for assistance;
  3. Subjected to fact-finding investigation;
  4. Docketed as a criminal, administrative and/or forfeiture case; or
  5. Dismissed outright. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule II, Sec. 3)

An administrative complaint may be dismissed outright if it appears that:

  1. The complainant has an adequate remedy in another judicial or quasi-judicial body;
  2. The complaint pertains to a matter outside the jurisdiction of the Office of the Ombudsman;
  3. The complaint is trivial, frivolous, vexatious or made in bad faith;
  4. The complainant has no sufficient personal interest in the subject matter of the grievance; or
  5. The complaint was filed after one year from the occurrence of the act or omission complained of.

Meanwhile, a criminal complaint, or a forfeiture complaint where applicable, may be dismissed outright if it appears that:

  1. The complaint is devoid of palpable merit;
  2. The crime has clearly prescribed;
  3. There is lack of jurisdiction on the part of the Office of the Ombudsman, and a referral to another agency/office with exclusive jurisdiction over the person/subject-matter cannot be properly made; or
  4. The criminal charge is inextricably linked to the merits of an actual case or matter handled by a court, tribunal or agency, and the complaint indirectly calls upon the Office of the Ombudsman to review the validity, propriety or manner of issuance of a ruling or order of such court, tribunal or agency. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule II, Secs. 4 & 5)

Upon docketing of the formal complaint, the preliminary investigation, administrative adjudication, and/or preliminary inquiry (akin to preliminary investigation) shall be conducted in the following manner:

  1. Upon his/her receipt of the case records, the investigating officer, within a period of five (5) days, shall issue an order, attaching thereto a copy of the complaint and supporting affidavits or documents, directing the respondent to submit, within a non-extendible period of fifteen (15) days from receipt thereof, his/her counter- affidavit and controverting evidence, with proof of service to the complainant. The complainant may file a reply-affidavit, within a non-extendible period of five (5) days from receipt of the counter-affidavit, with proof of service to the respondent/s.
  2. A clarificatory hearing may be conducted at the discretion of the investigating officer, subject to the approval of the bureau director, wherein the parties shall be afforded the opportunity to be present but without the right to examine or cross- examine.
  3. If the respondent does not file a counter-affidavit within the reglementary period despite due notice, or cannot be served with the order to file counter-affidavit or refuses to receive the said order, the complaint shall be deemed submitted for resolution on the basis of the evidence on record.
  4. After submission of the last responsive pleading or upon the termination of a clarificatory hearing, if one is conducted, the investigating officer shall issue an order declaring that the case is submitted for resolution. Where it appears that no responsive pleading has been filed, a case is deemed submitted for resolution after the expiration of thirty (30) days from the service of the order or pleading to be answered. Once a case is submitted for resolution, no further pleadings or documents shall be entertained.

In the manner of filing pleadings and other submissions, Section 3 of Rule 13 of the Rules of Court shall apply suppletorily, subject to the e-filing guidelines to be issued by the Office of the Ombudsman. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VIII, Secs. 3 & 5)


Yes, the following pleadings are prohibited and shall be expunged from the records:

  1. Motion to Dismiss;
  2. Motion for Bill of Particulars;
  3. Second and subsequent motions for reconsideration and/or reinvestigation, however denominated; and
  4. Dilatory motions and pleadings. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VIII, Sec. 4)

Yes. Pending investigation, the respondent may be preventively suspended without pay if, in the judgment of the Ombudsman or the Deputy Ombudsman, the evidence of guilt is strong, and (a) the charge against such officer or employee involves serious dishonesty, oppression, grave misconduct, or gross neglect in the performance of duty, (b) the charge would warrant removal from the service; or (c) the respondent’s continued stay in office may prejudice the just, fair and independent disposition of the case filed against him. The order of preventive suspension shall be immediately executory. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VI, Sec. 3)

The preventive suspension shall continue until the case is terminated; however, the total period of preventive suspension shall not exceed six (6) months. Nevertheless, when the delay in the disposition of the case is due to the fault, negligence or any cause attributable to the respondent, the period of such delay shall not be counted in computing the period of suspension. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VI, Sec. 3)

Within thirty (30) days from the date the case is submitted for resolution, the investigating officer shall prepare and submit his/her findings and recommendation together with the Information or the Petition for Forfeiture, where applicable, and the records of the case to the proper authorities for their appropriate action. The period herein prescribed may be extended by written authority of the Ombudsman or the Deputy Ombudsman for justifiable reasons. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VIII, Sec. 3[e])

Yes. A motion for reconsideration may be filed within a non-extendible period of ten (10) days from receipt of the resolution, decision or order on any of the following grounds:

  1. New evidence had been discovered which materially affects the decision or order
  2. Grave errors of facts or laws or serious irregularities have been committed prejudicial to the interest of the movant.

    3. Only one such motion shall be allowed, with the corresponding leave of court in case the Information has already been filed in court. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VIII, Sec. 7)

The investigating officer shall resolve the motion for reconsideration within five (5) days from the date of submission for resolution, that is from receipt of the comment on the motion or, where it appears that no comment has been filed, after the expiration of thirty (30) days from the filing of the motion. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VIII, Sec. 7 in relation to Sec. 5)

No. The filing of a motion for reconsideration/reinvestigation shall not bar the filing of the corresponding Information in Court. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VIII, Sec. 7)

The decision shall be executed as a matter of course and shall be strictly enforced and properly implemented. The filing of a motion for reconsideration or an appeal shall not stay the immediate execution of the decision. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VIII, Sec. 8)

The refusal or failure by any officer without just cause to comply with the directive to immediately implement the decision and submit a report of compliance within ten (10) days from receipt thereof shall be a ground for contempt and disciplinary action against such officer. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VIII, Sec. 8)

Where the respondent is absolved of the charge or where the penalty imposed is public censure or reprimand, suspension of not more than one month, or a fine equivalent to one month salary, the decision shall be final, executory and unappealable. In all other cases, the ruling may be appealed to the Court of Appeals by way of a Petition for 7 Review under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court within fifteen days from receipt of the Order resolving the motion for reconsideration; provided that the filing of a motion for reconsideration shall be considered a condition sine qua non for availing of appellate remedies in light of the principle of exhaustion of available administrative remedies. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VIII, Sec. 8)

Upon a finding of administrative liability, the Ombudsman has the discretion to impose a principal penalty ranging from reprimand to dismissal from the service with due regard to the circumstances of the case. In the event that the penalty of suspension can no longer be enforced due to respondent’s separation from the service (e.g., retirement, resignation, or expiration of the term of office), the penalty shall be converted into a fine in an amount equivalent to respondent’s salary for the number of months corresponding to the period of suspension, payable to the Office of the Ombudsman, and may be deducted from respondent’s retirement benefits, accrued leave credits or any receivable from his/her office. The penalty of fine shall be computed on the basis of the respondent’s gross basic monthly salary (without including allowances/benefits and prior to statutory deductions) prevailing at the time of execution of the penalty. In case the respondent is no longer in service, the computation shall be based on his or her last gross basic monthly rate as appearing in the latest service record or equivalent certification. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VI, Sec. 5)

The penalty of dismissal from the service carries with it the accessory penalties of cancellation of eligibility, perpetual disqualification from holding public office, bar from taking the civil service examinations, and forfeiture of retirement benefits. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule VI, Sec. 5)

The immunity from prosecution may be granted upon application of the concerned party, the investigating, hearing, or prosecuting officer, or at the instance of the Ombudsman. However, in all cases, the party concerned shall execute an affidavit reciting the substance of his/her proposed testimony and/or the nature of the evidence in his/her possession. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule X, Sec. 1[a], 2nd par.)

Yes. The Ombudsman may revoke the grant of immunity from prosecution upon proper notice in the event that the person granted immunity subsequently retracts his/her statement, or fails or refuses to testify or produce evidence in court in accordance with the sworn statement upon which his/her immunity was granted. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule X, Sec. 1[c])

The grant of immunity from prosecution shall neither exempt the party concerned from criminal prosecution for perjury or false testimony, nor shall he/she be exempt from administrative liability including removal from office. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), Rule X, Sec. 1[c])

In all matters not provided in the Revised Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman, the Rules of Court shall apply in a suppletory character or by analogy whenever practicable. (A.O. No. 1 (2026), RuleX, Sec.7)