The recent preventive suspension order on Dr. Roy B. Ferrer, former president and CEO of the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation and 10 other active PhilHeaith officials, was questioned this week for allegedly being “premature and null and void.”
The order issued by Ombudsman Samuel Martires last August 8 was criticized in an “official statement” released by Ferrer’s legal counsel lawyer Francis Romulo I. Badilla, stating that “no formal charge or summons was issued against Ferrer and the issuance of a preventive suspension order was in violation of his right to due process.
Also suspended were Celestina Ma. Jude dela Serna, Ruben John A. Basa, Dennis S. Mas, Shirley B. Domingo, Rodolfo del Rosario Jr., Raul Dominic Badilla, Israel Pargas, Angelito Grande, Lawrence Mijares and Leila Tuazon, who are either doctors or lawyers occupying top positions or members of the board of PhilHealth.
Copies of Martires’ order for six months without pay were furnished PhilHealth President and CEO Ricardo Morales and Health Secretary Francisco Duque III. PhilHealth ex-officio chairman of the board for implementation.
“The charges filed against Dr. Ferrer. et al have nothing to do with corruption nor the alleged loss of billions of pesos of PhilHealth..” Dr. Ferrer is nit being charged with corruption nor malversation,” the one-and-a-half page statement bared.
“Dr. Ferrer was appointed to PhilHealth and given specific instryctions and directive by PRRD (Pres. Rodrigo R. Duterte) to clean up PhilHealth in preparation for the Universal Health Care.”
Pursuant to this mandate, the Board of Directors of PhilHealth under DOH ( Department of Health) Sec. Duque, after investigation and due process issued suspension and dismissal orders against certain PhilHealth officials.
“Dr. Ferrer merely implemented the order of PhilHealth chairman, Secretary Duque and the board of directors. In retaliation, the officials affected by orders of dismissal and suspension, filed charges of oppression and other accusations.against Dr Ferrer and the 10.others.
Despite the fact that no formal charge or summons were against Ferrer, a preventive suspension order was issued.
” The issuance of the preventive suspension is in violation of the right to due process.”
It is likewise claimed that “the Office of the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction over the case and also over the persoms of the respondents-movants ( Ferrer, et al).”
It said that there is an Ombudsman-Civil Service Commission memorandum of agreement on a Complaint Referral System dated December 12, 2016.
Under MOA, the case against Ferrer and the.others should have been referred to the CSC “for proper investigation and disposition.”
Ferrer’s camp also charged that they have not received copies of the complaint-affidavit and other pieces of evidence, “hence there is no formal charge against the respondents.”
It said that “the preventive suspension was issued with grave error of fact and law and that serious irregularities have been committed prejudicial to the interest of the respondent-movants.
The preventive suspension, the statement added, can only be issued during a pending investigation. Since Dr. Ferrer has not been summoned and required to answer the charges, there is no pending investigation yet. Hence, the preventive suspension is premature and null and void.”
