The Office of the Ombudsman has dismissed both the criminal and administrative complaints filed against Executive Secretary Ralph G. Recto in connection with the transfer of PhilHealth reserve funds to the National Treasury when he was still finance chief.
In a 40-page Consolidated Resolution, the Ombudsman dismissed the criminal complaints against Recto and Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) President and CEO Emmanuel Rufino Ledesma Jr., citing a lack of prima facie evidence that would establish a reasonable certainty of conviction.
The complaints had alleged technical malversation, violations of Section 3 of Republic Act No. 3019, and plunder arising from the transfer of PhilHealth reserve funds pursuant to provisions of the 2024 General Appropriations Act (GAA).
‘[The] Respondents’ acts do not amount to the crime of Plunder as defined by law. On the contrary, DOF Secretary Recto was commended, in Pimentel, for his commitment to return the PhP60Billion to PhilHealth,’ the ruling said.
‘Thus, the return of the PhP60Billion to PhilHealth militates against the allegation that respondents took advantage of their positions for ‘personal enrichment,” it added.
The Ombudsman likewise dismissed the administrative complaint for grave misconduct against Recto and Ledesma Jr., ruling that the allegations were unsupported by sufficient evidence.
According to the resolution, the transfer of funds was undertaken in pursuant to a congressional directive contained in the 2024 GAA. The records also showed that the action was supported by legal opinions and consultations with relevant government agencies, including the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel, the Commission on Audit, and the Governance Commission for GOCCs or government-owned or controlled corporations.
Moreover, the resolution found no sufficient basis to establish bad faith, corrupt motive, manifest partiality, or any unlawful intent on the part of Recto in relation to the implementation of the fund transfer.
‘On the administrative aspect of the complaint, the elements of corruption, clear intent to violate the law or flagrant and palpable breach of duty are not manifest in the present case. In the absence of contrary evidence, what will prevail is the presumption that respondents regularly performed their duties,’ the resolution said. #