• GILBERT P. BAYORAN
The Office of the Ombudsman has dismissed the complaints of grave misconduct and RA 3019, or Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, filed against former La Castellana Mayor Alme Rhummyla Nicor Mangilimutan, for lack of substantial evidence and lack of probable cause.
Complainant Elvin dela Fuente alleged in his complaints that Maricel Madrigal and Jocelyn Magbanua, who were employed as a household helper and laundrywoman, respectively, of Mangilimutan, who is currently the vice mayor of La Castellana, served as job order employees of the municipal government, assigned in the Clean and Green Program, and receiving salaries as such.
The claims of dela Fuente were supported by the written statements of Madrigal and Magbanua, Ombudsman records showed.
In her counter-affidavit, Mangilimutan dismissed the allegations as untrue and baseless, asserting that the complaint has been used to harass her, and is politically-motivated, as she and dela Fuente were both vying for the position as vice mayor of La Castellana during the May 2025 elections.
She also described the undated and unsworn statements of Magdrigal and Magbanua as “lies”, stressing that she did not engage their services as household staff, nor did they receive any salaries from the municipal government, except for when they were included to work under the Clean and Green Program of the town for a period of one month, from March 11, 2020 to April 15 of the same year.
But Mangilimutan admitted to have personally paid Madrigal for rendering massage services, and Magbanua, who offered to do some laundry services, as she needed extra income to feed her family.
The Ombudsman ruling states that the basic rule is that mere allegation is not evidence, and is not equivalent to proof, noting that charges were based on mere suspicion and speculation, which should not be given credence.
When the complainant relies on mere conjectures and suspicions, and fails to substantiate his allegations, the complaint must be dismissed for lack of merit, it added.
In the same vein, the administrative complaint for grave misconduct, which arose from the above-discussed criminal complaint, must likewise fail, the Ombudsman further said.
It added that the allegations in the complaint were not corroborated with any substantial evidence to show that the respondent acted with any intention to commit a wrong or flagrant disregard of existing laws to hold her liable for grave misconduct.
For lack of substantial evidence, the administrative complaint for grave misconduct, and for lack of probable cause for violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019, filed against Mangilimutan were both dismissed by the Ombudsman.*
