1 day Ago By John Paul Seblos
A COMPLAINT filed against Cebu City Mayor Raymond Alvin Garcia and City Legal Officer Santiago Ortiz Jr., concerning Ortiz’s appointment in August 2024, has been dismissed by the Office of the Ombudsman. According to a letter dated March 7, 2025, from the Ombudsman, the complaint, lodged by Mark Lester Ceballos, Kristian Hassamal and Vicente Esmena, was found to be without merit.
This is the sixth complaint against Garcia questioning the legitimacy of his assumption as mayor that the Ombudsman has dropped. The dismissal follows an Evaluator’s Report dated Feb. 6, which detailed the allegations and the Ombudsman’s rationale.
The complainants alleged that Garcia unlawfully appointed Ortiz as city legal officer on Aug. 28, 2024, during the preventive suspension of then mayor Michael Rama. They further claimed that Ortiz facilitated questionable transactions by issuing favorable legal opinions.
However, the Ombudsman’s report cited Section 46 of Republic Act 7160, or the Local Government Code of 1991, which allows an acting local chief executive to exercise the power to appoint employees if the period of temporary incapacity exceeds 30 working days. The report specifically highlighted the provision: “When the governor, city or municipal mayor..
. is temporarily incapacitated..
. such as..
. suspension from office..
. the vice-governor, city or municipal vice-mayor..
. shall automatically exercise the powers and perform the duties and functions of the local chief executive concerned, except the power to appoint, suspend, or dismiss employees which can only be exercised if the period of temporary incapacity exceeds 30 working days.” Garcia became the full-fledged mayor on Oct.
9, 2024, after Rama’s dismissal by the Ombudsman for nepotism and grave misconduct related to the hiring of two brothers-in-law as City Hall employees. Rama’s dismissal included perpetual disqualification from reemployment in government service. Prior to this, Garcia had been serving as acting mayor since May 2024, during Rama’s suspension for a separate complaint.
Regarding the allegation that Ortiz facilitated questionable transactions through favorable legal opinions, the Ombudsman stated that the complainants “failed to support their claim or attach pertinent documents that would warrant further action by the Office.” Based on these findings, Acting Director Corazon Arnado-Carrillo of the Complaint and Referral Evaluation, Monitoring and Enforcement Bureau of the Ombudsman recommended the outright dismissal of the complaint. / JPS.
