Following are the recommendations of the Incident Investigation and Review Committee that investigated the Aug. 23 hostage tragedy. This was withheld when President Aquino released the fact-finding part of the report. The recommendations are being reviewed by the presidential legal panel headed by Executive Secretary Jojo Ochoa and Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Eduardo de Mesa.
Recommendations
In light of the preceding discussions on the accountability of the above-mentioned public officials, PNP officers and private individuals based on their corresponding acts and omissions during the August 23, 2010 Rizal Park Hostage-taking crisis, the Committee hereby recommends the following actions:
1. Against PCSUPT (General) Rodolfo Y. Magtibay, the initiation of the corresponding administrative proceedings is recommended based on the following grounds:
a. Serious Irregularities in the Performance of Duties – for countermanding the order of his superior officer, Police Director (General) Leocadio Santiago Jr. to use the PNP SAF-CRG in the assault of the hostaged bus, and in direct opposition to the clear and categorical order of the President to do so as relayed through said superior officer;
b. Gross incompetence – for manifest lack of adequate ability and fitness to satisfactorily perform his police duties as ground commander in the hostage-taking incident as established in this investigation, resulting in the needless and tragic death of eight (8) foreign tourists and the injury of seven (7) others;
At the same time, it is recommended that a preliminary investigation be conducted by the appropriate government agency for any possible criminal liability that may have been committed arising from the commission of the above offenses and in the course of the execution of his command during the hostage crisis.
2. Against Police Director Leocadio Santiago Jr., the initiation of the corresponding administrative proceedings is recommended for Less Grave Neglect of Duty on the following grounds:
a. For his failure to execute lawful orders from higher authority when he failed to implement the order of the President to use the PNP SAF-CRG in the assault of the hostaged bus;
b. For his failure to make immediate correction or take appropriate action when a dereliction of duty has been committed in his presence by a subordinate under his command by failing to take immediate action to correct:
i. the countermanding of the Order of the President by Gen. Magtibay to use the PNP SAF-CRG in the assault of the hostaged bus more than 30 minutes into the assault of the SWAT even when he was merely two blocks away from the scene of the incident at Emerald Hotel monitoring the actions of Gen. Magtibay through Col. Medina of the NCRPO;
ii. the failure of the local City CMC to properly respond to the crisis situation and to constitute and organize the Regional Critical Incident Management Task Group (CIMTG) to take over the local CIMTG and CMC.
At the same time, it is recommended that a preliminary investigation be conducted by the appropriate government agency for any possible criminal liability arising from the commission of the above offenses and in the course of the execution of his command during the hostage crisis.
3. Against Police Director General Jesus A. Verzosa, the initiation of the corresponding administrative proceedings is recommended for Less Grave Neglect of Duty in his failure to execute lawful orders from higher authority when he failed to implement the order of the President to use the PNP SAF-CRG in the assault of the hostaged bus and for his failure to monitor the crisis situation at the NCMOC as provided in the CMC Manual and as such respond adequately and give effect to decisive actions as may have been needed, but instead proceeding to Cagayan De Oro in the middle of the hostage crisis.
At the same time, it is recommended that a preliminary investigation be conducted by the appropriate government agency for any possible criminal liability arising from the commission of the above offenses and in the course of the execution of his command during the hostage crisis.
4. Against Undersecretary Rico E. Puno, the initiation of the corresponding administrative proceedings is recommended for gross negligence under the appropriate civil service laws, rules and regulations for neglecting to disseminate and ensure the implementation of the order of the President to utilize the PNP SAF-CRG in the assault of the hostaged bus and for failure to exercise with due diligence his supervisory powers over the PNP as ordered by the President.
At the same time, it is recommended that a preliminary investigation be conducted by the appropriate government agency for any possible criminal liability arising from commission of the above offenses and in the course of the execution of his duties as DILG Undersecretary during the hostage crisis and in assuming the position of the DILG Secretary as NPOC CMC.
5. Against Mayor Alfredo S. Lim, the initiation of the corresponding administrative and criminal proceedings for assuming the authority of the on-scene commander in negotiation and tactical action or intervention in contravention of Section 1.7.2 of the CMC Manual, for negligence in his failure to properly organize and constitute the Crisis Management Committee in accordance with the CMC Manual of 2000, for issuing an illegal order during the arrest of Gregorio Mendoza, for abandoning and ordering the on-scene commander to abandon the Advanced Command Post at the height of the hostage crisis and, in general, for failure to perform his duties as CMC Chairman as discussed in the previous section constituting dereliction of duty and gross negligence, in accordance with Sec. 60 (c) of R.A. 7160.
6. Against Vice Mayor Francisco Domagoso, the initiation of the corresponding administrative proceedings for negligence in his failure to properly execute his duties and functions as Vice Chairman of the Crisis Management Committee and for dereliction of duty for abandoning the Advance Command Post at the height of the hostage crisis, in accordance with Sec. 60 (c) of R.A. 7160.
7. Against PSUPT. Orlando Yebra, the initiation of the corresponding administrative proceedings is recommended based on the ground of gross incompetence, for manifest lack of adequate ability and fitness to satisfactorily perform his police duties as Chief Negotiator in the hostage-taking incident as established in this investigation, resulting in the needless and tragic death of eight (8) foreign tourists and the injury of the seven (7) others;
At the same time, it is recommended that a preliminary investigation be conducted by the appropriate government agency for any possible criminal liability arising from the commission of the above offenses and in the course of the execution of his office as Chief Negotiator during the hostage crisis.
8. Against PCINSP. Santiago Pascual III, the initiation of the corresponding administrative proceedings is recommended on the ground of gross incompetence, for manifest lack of adequate ability and fitness to satisfactorily perform his police duties as Over-all Assault Team Leader in the hostage-taking incident as established in this investigation, resulting in the prolonged agony of the surviving injured hostages for the rescue that should have arrived and succeeded in minutes, instead of an hour.
At the same time, it is recommended that a preliminary investigation be conducted by the appropriate government agency for any possible criminal liability arising from the commission of the above offenses and in the course of the execution of his office as Over-all Assault Team Leader during the hostage crisis.
9. Against Tanodbayan (Ombudsman) Merceditas Gutierrez, the initiation of further investigation to determine whether the offenses established in the preceding section qualify as grounds for impeachment of the Ombudsman, in accordance with the discussion in the previous section.
10. Against Deputy Ombudsman Emilio Gonzales III, the referral of the findings of this investigation to the Office of the President for further determination of possible administrative offenses as discussed in the previous section and for the initiation of the proper administrative proceedings.
11. Against Michael Rogas and Erwin Tulfo, the endorsement of the results of this investigation to the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (KBP) for the purpose of imposing sanctions for violating the Code of Ethics applicable to broadcast journalists and to include the Radio Station Manager of DZXL, and person(s) in charge for directing the program, for allowing the “interview” with the hostage-taker to be undertaken and aired endangering the lives of persons involved in the hostage-taking. It is further recommended, that the Department of Justice initiate an investigation to determine any other culpability.
12. Against ABC5, ABS-CBN and GMA7, the endorsement of the results of this investigation to the KBP, or appropriate media “watchdog” organization(s), for the possible violation of their code of ethics in the coverage of a crisis incident.
This is without prejudice to the findings to be arrived at in future proceedings as to the culpability of other officials and individuals.
(Copy of recommendations courtesy of Abante)
Thanks.
—–
To P.Noy,
Let’s get this whole thing over and done with ASAP. Ochoa and de Mesa can easily ask research assistants to find laws applicable to whoever violated them.
I hope after your “junket” (junk food binge) there in the States, the “second opinion” of your legal team will be ready for their recommendations. The DOJ Sec (and other agencies to file the charges) can do her job soon after.
—–
To Mayor Lim,
That’s the problem, sir, when “no one is in charge” (as one article is entitled), everyone will be charged…a la shotgun blast with the supposed-to-be “head” mostly taking the shots.
Finally!
Recommendations sound good to me, Ellen. Quite right that Puno should not be off the hook at all and should be investigated with a view to determining criminal liabilities.
Bravo, Sec de Lima! Bravo!
But I do have one question: why has Versoza been virtually absolved of criminal negligence?
I say to Pres Aquino, get on with it, i.e., instruct your legal advisers to submit their opinion quickly, hopefully resulting in criminal and administrative proceedings being filed against those in the list, so that Sec de Lima can buckle down to work and tackle the Ampatuans!
Mas mabuti pang buwagin or i stop na ang IIRC dahil walang kuwenta, at nagsasayang lang ng oras ang mga nasa government officials natin. Tagalang INUTIL itong administrasyon ABNOY/Noynoy gusto pang meron IIRC part 2, okei din ang pag iisip nya dahil nagpapatunay na gustong e save ang mga tuta niyang sugarol at salot sa lipunan.
ABNOY/noynoy kami ang boss mo… KAYA MAKINIG KA! kami ang nagpapasuweldo sayo kaya makinig ka.
Anna, I just talked a DOJ insider, he said to take note of the phrase “it is recommended that a preliminary investigation be conducted by the appropriate government agency for any possible criminal liability…” in the case of Versoza, Puno, Magtibay, Santiago, Yebra,and Pascual.
The deadline for them to submit the report was tight. Rather than err on details, they resorted to that blanket recommendation to avoid these people getting off the hook easily.
As to media, he said there is the sentence at the end, “This is without prejudice to the findings to be arrived at in future proceedings as to the culpability of other officials and individuals.”
Hmmmm. These recommendations could have been arrived at even without the IIRC. The IIRC Report is for China’s consumption, to enable RP to mend its relations with the Asian bully, China. More investigations to come as a result of the IIRC Report. Nobody is getting fired yet if ever. No heads will roll. The recommendations and findings may just end up deep among the piles of unfinished investigations. We may just be better off to forget about this. Its pathetic. Will Ochoa and de Mesa come up with a better review? I don’t think so. They may make a new spin to sanitize the President’s image. And they will spin a review that will make China happier. With past events, I can’t resist thinking this way.
He would be committing a very big mistake if PNoy thinks he can downgrade the recommendations of the IIRC.
The IIRC did a good job, considering the time constraint. Also, they were not shy in naming who they found to be accountable.
Those charged can fight the charges, so closure on this issue will take a while. This, however should not stop NOnoy from acting quickly. Besides, he had already indicated disappointment with some of those charged, even before the IIRC report.
So, the ball is in Noynoy’s court.
Sulong na PNoy! Huwag mo ng ipa-review si Sec. de Lima as what your best pal Ochoa was saying that they plan to “simplify” the report for PNoy’s level of comprehension. Gago pala itong si Ochoa, he demeaned his own bossing.
Agree Ellen that PNoy will commit a blunder if he won’t follow Sec. de Lima’s recommendation. The lady is his best cabinet member, 10 Ochoa’s hindi pa ka-level nya….
Baka naman Chi, Ochoa knows too well his friend. He knows him more than we do.
🙂 Ellen, seems to be an underlying meaning to your reply to Chi – hehehe.
That’s why Ochoa needn’t have said that — the recommendations looked pretty straightforward and simple to me. What’s there to simplify? Ochoa just made his boss seem ga ga… Good heavens!
When in a hole, stop digging guys!
Yahahaha, si Ellen!
Pasimple pa sana ako e, hehehe! Si Ochoa is not thinking, he’s simpy telling the truth! Ayan, galing sa akin yan! 🙂 🙂 🙂
Medyo pinipitik na ninyo si abnoy at mga ka tropa niya ha! dati sampalatayo kayo sa kanya… marami pa tayong madidiskobre at ma encounter na problema sa administrayon noynoy. umpisa pa lang yan….
Who needs a friend like Ochoa?
Can blame him either, He knows his friend too well. but still that’s a brazen show of disrespect to a boss friend. Will Noynoy react?
I guess not. He knows his intellectual limitations.It’s not in the level of his comprehension.
He may even be thankful for simplifying things for him.
Kaya naman pala ngumangawa si Mayor Lim. Mabigat nga talaga ang naging kapabayaan niya. Lim had been a good soldier but on the 23rd o August, he was a BAD manager.
( http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/09/23/10/iirc-7-face-criminal-admin-raps )
Mismo!
Swak ni Ang See!
MICHAEL ROGAS: Captain Rolando Mendoza, good evening, sir…
CAPT. ROLANDO MENDOZA: Good evening, sir.
MICHAEL: This is Michael Rogas from RMN. Sir, you are the hostage taker, is it right?
MENDOZA: Right, sir.
MICHAEL: What is your plan at this juncture, sir?
x x x x x
(The ever hopeful Mendoza reads aloud the Ombudsman’s letter upon the request of Rogas. Note that Mendoza is already in personal contact with Orlando Yebra, the chief negotiator.)
MENDOZA: x x x x x…for me this is trash, this letter is trash! This is not what I need!
MICHAEL: Ok, what’s your plan, sir? Now that your demand was not met…
MENDOZA: For me this is trash, this is not what I need. What I need is their decision, reversing or not reversing (my dismissal). That’s it! Thank you for the effort of the mayor and the vice mayor, I don’t need that letter, sir.
MICHAEL: What is your plan now, sir, what do you want?
MENDOZA: There’s nothing in that (letter), nothing, none whatsoever, sir. It only says a review will be done. In effect, nothing will come of it, nothing, sir. That paper is nothing to me, if it said (I am) dismissed already, nothing will happen as a result (of that letter), sir.
MICHAEL: Captain, what’s your plan now, sir?
MENDOZA (addressing Yebra): This one, I’ll make an example of this one, step aside, go away…I don’t need that (letter), sir, that letter has nothing to say…you, you’re a lawyer…there’s nothing in that (letter)!
MICHAEL: Captain, wait, please calm down.
MICHAEL: Captain, take it easy, sir…What’s your plan now, sir, inasmuch as your demand was not granted, we will call the Ombudsman at this point in time.
MENDOZA: Most likely something bad will happen inside this bus.
MICHAEL: Wait, through us, RMN (live radio broadcast), what is your request (from the authorities)?
x x x x x
—–
Clearly, the negotiator failed MISERABLY in his job as he wasn’t able to frame a “yes-able” proposition to the hostage taker. Imagine asking an already impatient (Read: pissed off) gunman to still wait for a review???
And adding insult to injury had the temerity to “lie” to the hostage taker (borne by his incoordination with assistant negotiator Romeo Salvador who promised to return the brother’s handgun and the extreme error of bringing along the brother whose presence is already suspect the first time this brother appeared on the scene)???
Nonetheless, I believe a re-negotiation can still be done with a new…this time, trustworthy…negotiator.
All demands of Mendoza are negotiable even up to the last minute: the primary demand (reinstatement) and the instant demands (pullout of the snipers, withdrawal of the SWAT team seen deploying, and stopping the arrest of his brother – regardless if Mendoza saw the “manhandling” on TV).
If only the events were not overtaken by Rogas’ so-called “interview.” If only Rogas didn’t “harass” Mendoza. If only Rogas didn’t “promise” an effective communication to authorities. If only Rogas didn’t put upon himself and RMN the task of mediating the hostage taker’s demands…
If only RMN (through Jake Maderazo) alerted the police early on the “interview” of their ongoing talks with Mendoza…
If only Mendoza was given an opportunity of a TRUE DIALOGUE, then none of the innocents are dead today.
—–
Quote of the Year:
“The interview by (radio reporter) Michael Rogas gave the hostages an extra few hours to live,” Pimentel, a former senator, told the station.
http://business.inquirer.net/money/topstories/view/20100921-293504/Radio-rejects-hostage-phone-hogging-allegations
—–
The politicians and the police are accountable but those irresponsible members of media, by virtue of their constitutionally-protected primary right to press freedom, are NOT. The most they will get, if ever found guilty of Grave Offense (first time) by the “self-regulatory” body of the KBP – the KBP Standards Authority – is a Php15,000 fine plus reprimand (Rogas and Tulfo) and Php30,000 fine plus censure (RMN).
If the whole picture of the culminating events of the August 23 Hostage Incident will not be understood then those irresponsible members of media will continue with their irresponsibility…”only doing their jobs,” as they are mouthing what they did, with clean hands…when all the while they are bloodied by their insatiable hunger for news and their unquenchable thirst for fame!
—–
Media vilifying media should probably be a part of SELF-REGULATION.
Media vilifying media should probably be a part of SELF-REGULATION.
http://manilatimes.net/index.php/opinion/26840-vilifying-themselves
BROADCAST CODE OF 2007
Are pointers from Poynter universally accepted standards?
http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=4640
Maraming sigaw ng sigaw KAMI ang boss mo,sa palagay ng mga TAONG ito,ay sila ay may karapatan “self appointed” na boss,sumulyap ka na ba sa salamin tinanong ang sarili,ako ba ay may nagawa upang umunlad ang bayan? kasama ka ba ng mga “salot sa bayan” o na nakikinabang sa mga gawain ng kriminal sa bulsa ni JUAN.Ang lahat ay naging Api dahil sa mga kriminal ng bayan,ngayon sila ay pinagkaitan karapatan magnakaw,di na nga nag babayad ng buwis,nagnanakaw pa ng buwis para sa sarili,sisigaw parang sila ang may karapatan maging ang BOSS,tsk,tsk !!!! nakahiya naman sa sarili kapag ang salamin naglahad ang tunay katauhan iasang tao.