Jurisdiction Over Petitions for Review of Decisions of the Ombudsman in Administrative Cases
OCA Circular No. 66-09, issued on June 2, 2009, reminds all judges in the Philippines that petitions for review of decisions made by the Ombudsman in administrative cases fall under the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals, not the lower courts. This directive references the Supreme Court's rulings in Macalalag vs. Ombudsman and Fabian vs. Desierto, emphasizing that all appeals must comply with Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. Judges are instructed to strictly adhere to this guideline to ensure proper judicial process.
June 2, 2009
OCA CIRCULAR NO. 66-09
| TO | : | All Judges |
| SUBJECT | : | Jurisdiction Over Petitions for Review of Decisions of the Ombudsman in Administrative Cases |
It has come to the attention of the Court that there are judges who take cognizance of petitions involving Ombudsman decisions in administrative cases notwithstanding that jurisdiction thereon properly belongs to the Court of Appeals. aCASEH
All judges are therefore hereby reminded of the ruling of the Supreme Court in Macalalag vs. Ombudsman, et. al., G.R. No. 147995, 4 March 2004, citing the leading case of Fabian vs. Desierto (G.R. No. 129742, 16 September 1998), that:
''all appeals from decisions of the Ombudsman in administrative disciplinary cases are . . . to be taken to the Court of Appeals under Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedures."
Strict compliance is hereby enjoined.
(SGD.) JOSE P. PEREZCourt Administrator