Philippine Supreme Court Voids Former President's Firing of Deputy Ombudsman

The decision affirms that presidents lack the authority to fire officials in the Office of the Ombudsman, a constitutional body. The case originated from the deputy ombudsman's involvement in probing complaints about undeclared bank deposits linked to the former president.

The investigation began in 2017 after a then-senator filed a complaint alleging billion-peso undeclared deposits. The deputy ombudsman reviewed bank records provided by the Anti-Money Laundering Council and commented publicly on similarities to documents shown by the complainant.

This led to the former president's public threats and subsequent actions against the official.

July 2018, the former president ordered the suspension of the deputy ombudsman. The ombudsman at the time refused to comply, citing a prior Supreme Court ruling that prohibited such presidential interventions. After a change in leadership at the Office of the Ombudsman in 2019, the deputy ombudsman was removed from the position.

The deputy ombudsman challenged the removal in the Court of Appeals, which ruled in favor in 2021. However, the official's seven-year term had already ended in 2020. The current president's office appealed the appeals court decision to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court rejected the appeal in January 2026, with the decision made public last week. This ruling upholds the independence of the Office of the Ombudsman. It comes amid broader discussions on accountability, including ongoing investigations into flood control projects and complaints against health officials.

A group of health workers recently filed a graft complaint with the Ombudsman against a health undersecretary over alleged conflicts of interest involving a family-owned construction firm. Separately, a House committee found probable cause for impeachment against the vice president in a unanimous vote.