THE Supreme Court was asked to review decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman that supposedly downgraded charges filed against former President Benigno S. C. Aquino III for his role in Mamasapano, Maguindanao mission that led to the deaths of more than 40 police officers in January 2015.

Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC) and kin of Special Action Force (SAF) 44 represented by Felicitas D. Nacino and Helen E. Ramacula on Friday filed the petition for certiorari seeking to annul, reverse, and set aside the consolidated resolution and order issued by Ombudsman Conchita C. Morales dated June 13 and September 5, 2017 regarding the case.

Both orders were questioned by the petitioners, saying that the original case they filed was “the 44 counts of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide,” VACC legal counsel Ferdinand S. Topacio said.

Earlier this July, the Ombudsman has ordered the filing of charges against Mr. Aquino for his alleged role in the anti-terrorist operation. Mr. Aquino was ordered charged with usurpation of authority. Co-accused in the case are former Philippine National Police (PNP) chief Alan L. M. Purisima, and former SAF chief Getulio Napeñas, who was the commander of the unit at the time of the mission.

Although the operation was able to neutralize Malaysian terrorist and bomb-maker Zulkifli Abdhir, among others, it nevertheless also led to the deaths of the 44 SAF officers, and 18 others from the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and its splinter group, the Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters.

The petitioners challenged the said resolution and order of the Ombudsman, citing “grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction.”

“The Ombudsman is protecting the former president because the ‘usurpation of authority’ can be easily dismissed. For us, this was set up to be dismissed if the Supreme Court would investigate it, thereby protecting the former president from any criminal liability for the death of 44 troopers,” Mr. Topacio said.

“They can always say that the chief executive cannot usurp public authority because he is the chief executive. All authority emanates from him,” Mr. Topacio said.

The case has to be “44 counts of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide because according to the board of inquiry report, ultimately President Aquino is at fault.”

“What kind of Ombudsman is that? She is supposed to be a protector of the people, not of [Mr. Aquino], not of a particular party,” Mr. Topacio said. — Arjay L. Balinbin

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR