CA rejects Aumentado’s appeal, upholds ruling on illegal OGAR 

By DAVE SUAN ALBARADO

The Court of Appeals (CA) has dismissed an appeal filed by Bohol Governor Aris Aumentado and other provincial officials challenging a lower court decision that declared the Office of Government Accountability and Review (OGAR) unconstitutional.

In a resolution, the Court of Appeals’ Nineteenth Division dismissed the case for failure of the respondents-appellants to file the required appellant’s brief within the prescribed period.

Associate Justice Mercedita G. Dadole-Ygnacio, writing for the division that included Chairperson Gabriel T. Lagura-Yap and Associate Justice Gabriel T. Baddiri, cited Rule 50 of the Rules of Court, which allows dismissal when appellants fail to serve and file required documents on time.

The appellate court noted that the respondents-appellants received notice to file their memorandum and pay fees on April 8, 2024, but as of July 2, 2025, no appellant’s brief had been submitted.

“The right to appeal is statutory and one who seeks to avail of it must comply with the statute or rules,” the resolution said, quoting established case law. “A fundamental appellate rule is the filing of Appellant’s Brief.”

The Court of Appeals found no extraordinary circumstances that would justify excusing the failure to file the required brief, noting that counsel for the respondents-appellants had a duty to assist in the speedy and efficient administration of justice.

The dismissal upholds an October 31, 2023, decision by the Regional Trial Court Branch 2 in Tagbilaran City, which declared Executive Orders No. 2 and 2-A creating OGAR null and void.

CASE BACKGROUND

The legal challenge originated when Larry M. Pamugas, former officer-in-charge of the provincial agriculture office, filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition and injunction against OGAR’s creation by Aumentado’s executive orders.

Pamugas argued that OGAR was an illegal and unconstitutional office that usurped the functions of the Civil Service Commission and the Commission on Audit (COA).

In January 2024, RTC Judge Jennifer Marcos ruled in favor of Pamugas, declaring the executive orders creating OGAR contrary to law and violative of the 1987 Philippine Constitution. 

The court found that the orders violated the principle of separation of powers, as they exceeded the powers of the local chief executive and encroached upon the powers of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan.

The trial court also determined that OGAR was clearly a new and separate office with no legal basis under the Local Government Code, contrary to the respondents’ claims that it was merely an adjunct office under the Office of the Governor.

A top issue in the case involved legal representation. 

The trial court ruled that Aumentado, Leoncio Evasco, Emmanuel “Willy” Ramasola, Dan Lim, Susing Arcamo and Macario Delusa were not allowed to be represented by private lawyers because they were public officials performing public functions.

Judge Marcos stressed that the respondents were being sued in their official capacities and should have been represented by the Office of the Solicitor General or the Provincial Legal Office.

Citing the case of Domato-Togonan vs. COA, the court noted that a government agency may not hire private lawyers for a fee chargeable against public funds unless exceptional or extraordinary circumstances exist. 

The court found no such circumstances, as the respondents were merely defending the issuance of executive orders, which fell within the function of the Provincial Legal Office.

The trial court denied several motions filed by the respondents, including a motion to inhibit Judge Marcos for alleged bias and partiality, which the court characterized as a mere dilatory tactic.

The respondents had also argued that the court violated constitutional provisions requiring decisions to be based on facts and law, claiming the court failed to conduct a full trial. 

Judge Marcos rejected this argument, explaining that as a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, the court could render judgment based on pleadings and memoranda without conducting a trial, as the issues raised were purely questions of law rather than fact.

The trial court had ordered the respondents to cease and desist from implementing the executive orders and from performing any function under OGAR.

The Court of Appeals resolution noted that parties must immediately notify the court of any change of address or counsel, with failure to do so considered a waiver of their right to receive copies of court notices.

Under the procedural rules cited, parties who file litigious motions such as motions for reconsideration must ensure proof of receipt is filed with the court immediately so reglementary periods can be properly computed, with opposing parties required to file their opposition within five calendar days of receipt.

A government physician has publicly criticized the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) for what he describes as overly burdensome requirements that delay medical assistance to indigent patients seeking help with medication costs.

Dr. Edgardo Epe, a pediatric neurologist at Governor Celestino Gallares Memorial Medical Center in Tagbilaran City, voiced his concerns during an interview over DYTR’s “Newsmakers ug Uban Pa,” hosted by Ardy Araneta-Batoy.

Epe said patients requiring maintenance medication for chronic diseases face complicated obstacles when seeking financial aid from DSWD, despite having valid prescriptions he issues every three months.

“The agency asks for several requirements,” Epe said, noting that beyond prescriptions, DSWD demands multiple medical certificates and insists documents be error-free with no erasures.

The doctor said patients often wait in line for hours only to be turned away over minor documentation issues, forcing them to return to physicians for corrections and restart the waiting process.

“The patients have no recourse but to return to the doctor to fix the issue, which has caused undue delay,” Epe said.

He questioned why patients need more than one medical certificate when the prescription itself demonstrates ongoing medical need. 

DSWD also requires original copies of prescriptions for agency records, despite prescriptions being designed primarily for pharmacies, he said.

Epe appealed for DSWD to accept newly-issued prescriptions to expedite aid, noting that both national and local DSWD offices maintain strict compliance requirements.

NEUROLOGY

During the interview, Epe also shared insights on brain health and neurological disorders affecting children.

Epe holds a medical doctorate from Mindanao State University and is a board-certified pediatrician with subspecialty training in child neurology. 

He completed residency at Governor Celestino Gallares Memorial Medical Center and subspecialty residency at University of Santo Tomas Hospital in Manila.