MEXICO, PAMPANGA — Former Mayor Teddy Tumang and three ex-municipal officials have petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn a Court of Appeals ruling that upheld their 2022 dismissal by the Office of the Ombudsman.
In a motion filed on February 24, Tumang, along with Jesus Punzalan, Luz Bondoc, and Perlita Lagman, also sought a temporary restraining order to halt the enforcement of their removal while the case is under review.
Tumang contended that their dismissal was unjust, citing legal inconsistencies, procedural lapses, and excessive delays. The case stems from alleged violations of the Government Procurement Reform Act related to the 2008 purchase of construction materials without public bidding.
The complaint, however, was only filed in 2018—ten years after the transactions—and took another four years before the Ombudsman issued its decision.
“The delay in filing and resolving this case is a blatant violation of our right to due process. Justice delayed is justice denied,” Tumang argued in his petition.
While the Court of Appeals upheld the Ombudsman’s ruling on July 18, 2024, a separate decision on January 21, 2025, reinstated Punzalan, Bondoc, and Lagman in the same case. Tumang cited the conflicting rulings as evidence of “inconsistent and unfair treatment.”
He also invoked the condonation doctrine, a legal principle that previously absolved reelected officials of administrative liabilities for past offenses. Though the Supreme Court abandoned the doctrine in 2016, Tumang maintained that it should still apply to him, as he was reelected in 2010 before the ruling took effect.
“The Ombudsman cannot simply disregard a legal principle that was in effect at the time. It is unfair and unconstitutional,” he stated.
Additionally, he accused the Ombudsman of forum shopping, alleging that multiple complaints were filed over the same issue, leading to contradictory rulings.
With only four months remaining in his term, Tumang emphasized the urgency of his reinstatement.
“The people of Mexico, Pampanga, overwhelmingly voted for me in 2022. My removal not only undermines their will but also sets a dangerous precedent for elected officials,” he said.
He warned that any legal victory would be meaningless if his term expired before a final ruling. “I am not just fighting for myself, but for the integrity of our electoral and judicial systems. The Supreme Court must act now to prevent a grave injustice.”