The Office of the Ombudsman (OMB)has has declared retired Lt. Gen. Antonio Parlade Jr. and former Presidential Communications undersecretary Lorraine Marie Badoy guilty in an administrative complaint and reprimanded them for "red-tagging" the National Union of Peoples' Lawyers (NUPL), a group of human rights lawyers.
The OMB acted on NUPL's complaint which accused Parlade, Badoy and former national security adviser Hermogenes Esperon Jr. of "red-tagging" the lawyers' group as "communist terrorists" or "fronts" of the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People's Army-National Democratic Front of the Philippines (CPP-NPA-NDFP) and "endangering: the lives and security of its members.
"Red-tagging" is the practice of law enforcers and national intelligence groups to name individuals or groups as "supporters" or "fronts" of terrorist organizations.
It said: "... this Office finds that some of these statements appear to criticize the NUPL, activists, and other progressive groups over activities which do not in itself constitute or amount to what a reasonable person would conceive as 'communist propaganda.' In particular, they both issued statements critical on the NUPL's forum on dissent and its information drive to educate the public about their rights amidst growing concerns of rights violations during the lockdown."
"Wherefore, this office finds respondents Parlade Jr. and Badoy guilty of conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service and imposes upon them the penalty of reprimand pursuant to Rule III, Section 10 of Administrative Order No. 7, as amended by Administrative Order No. 17," the OMB said in a decision signed by Ombudsman Samuel R. Martires last Aug. 9.
"The above-mentioned respondents are sternly warned that a repetition of a similar offense would be dealt with more severely," the OMB also said.
The administrative complaint against former National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon Jr. was dismissed.
In reprimanding Parlade and Badoy, who were both former spokespersons of the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC), the OMB said that the NUPL offered "substantial evidence" that the respondents made the said statements against the NUPL. The only issue left to prove was whether these declarations amounted to an "actionable wrong" that would necessitate the imposition of administrative sanctions, it said.
In this case, the only thing that the Ombudsman found against the respondents was Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service. The said offense holds officials liable for tarnishing the image and integrity of a public employee's office.
"Parlade and Badoy claimed that the statements attributed to them were made in the discharge of their functions as members of the NTF-ELCAC particularly their role to combat the propaganda," the OMB said.
It said it could not hold Esperon administratively liable because "the only attributable statements to Esperon is of him publicly defending Parlade and Badoy of their respective utterances."
The NUPL, headed by its President Edre Olalia and Secretary General Ephraim Cortez, filed the complaint and wanted to hold the respondents liable for violating Section 19 of R.A. 6770, the Ombudsman's law; Section 4(c) and (g) of R.A. 6713, the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees; grave misconduct, conduct prejudicial to the service, and grave abuse of authority.
Parlade Jr. was accused of "intensified vilification" of NUPL, and his "rabid" statements have often been used by state-run media groups. In a news report, Parlade Jr. even told the NUPL to stop defending the CPP and their "high profile communist terrorist cadre clients."
Esperon Jr. and Badoy, on the other hand, were accused of using their positions with the NTF-ELCAC to malign the NUPL. In her Facebook account, Badoy praised Parlade Jr. for his "bravery" when he gate-crashed the NUPL forum "Weaponizing the Law, Criminalizing Dissent."
"As in the case of respondent Parlade, respondents Badoy and Esperon have viciously, relentlessly, baselessly and maliciously, without any credible, competent and admissible evidence in fact and in law that can stand in an impartial tribunal, uttered, instigated, induced, goaded tolerated, condoned and sanctioned such scurrilous attacks on NUPL, its members and complainants, using their public office and public funds," NUPL's complaint also stated.