- Petitioner
- Tolosa
- Respondent
- Ombudsman
- Citation
- G.R. No. 233234
- Court
- From Office of the Ombudsman-Mindanao to Court of Appeals-Cagayan de Oro City to Supreme Court
- Division
- First Division
- Ponente
- J.C. Reyes, Jr., J.
- Decided
- September 14, 2020
Summary
Napoleon Tolosa filed criminal and administrative complaints against Elizabeth Tatel, a DepEd finance officer who supervised lending institutions, for allegedly violating ethical standards by obtaining a P150,000 loan from One Network Bank. The Ombudsman dismissed both complaints, finding no evidence of solicitation and no prohibition against such loans. When Tolosa appealed to the Court of Appeals using Rule 43, the CA ruled he used the wrong remedy since Ombudsman decisions absolving respondents are final and unappealable. The Supreme Court affirmed, emphasizing that the proper remedy is a petition for certiorari under Rule 65, and upheld the Ombudsman's findings of no probable cause or substantial evidence. The case establishes important procedural rules for challenging Ombudsman decisions and clarifies the finality of exonerating administrative decisions.