In one of the most blistering public confrontations between two of the nation’s highest-ranking officials, Ombudsman Samuel Martires has openly and angrily dismantled accusations from the camp of Justice Secretary Boying Remulla, effectively warning him to “stop conducting press conferences” before he further embarrasses himself. The explosion of righteous fury from the Ombudsman came after his office was accused of issuing a “secret decision” to favor a senator, a claim Martires slammed as a malicious insult and a desperate attempt to divert public attention from the massive corruption scandals plaguing the government.

The controversy ignited over a years-old administrative case against Senator Joel Villanueva. Years ago, former Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales had ordered Villanueva’s dismissal. However, after a motion for reconsideration was filed, current Ombudsman Martires reviewed the case and, in 2019, signed a resolution reversing the original order and dismissing the charges, citing clear evidence that the signatures used against the senator were found to be forged. This 2019 reversal, which cleared the senator, is the decision now at the center of the storm.

The political firestorm erupted when Secretary Remulla’s office, apparently completely unaware of the 2019 reversal, recently attempted to enforce the original 2016 dismissal order against Villanueva—an order that had been defunct for years. When Remulla was informed that the case was already dismissed, his camp allegedly recoiled and labeled Martires’s 2019 resolution a “secret decision,” implying it was hidden from the public and that only Martires and Villanueva knew about it.

This accusation of secrecy is what sent Ombudsman Martires into a fury. He blasted the claim as “not true” and a direct “insult” to the diligent investigating officers, directors, and assistant ombudsmen who all reviewed the evidence and recommended the dismissal. Martires clarified that just because his office didn’t publicize the 2019 reversal—a courtesy he claims he extended to avoid fanfare—does not mean it was “secret.” He angrily questioned why Remulla, upon learning of the reversal, didn’t simply request the official case records instead of launching a public attack.

This led to the stunning, direct warning from Martires to his counterpart. Looking visibly agitated, the Ombudsman gave a piece of chilling advice: “I would advise… if you are listening… stop conducting press conferences almost every day because you will never know what is really happening in the office of the ombudsman.” This public dressing-down was a clear message that Remulla had waded into a fight without knowing the facts, and in doing so, had made himself look utterly foolish.

But the Ombudsman didn’t stop there. He posed a powerful counter-theory for the entire manufactured drama. Martires declared that this entire “flavor of the month” scandal about a “secret decision” is nothing more than a calculated “diversionary tactic.” He suggested this attack on his office’s integrity was a desperate smokescreen to shift the nation’s focus away from the real issues: the “ghost projects” and the trillion-peso anomalies surrounding the nation’s flood control budget.

To add insult to injury, legal experts like former Senate President Franklin Drilon also weighed in, confirming that the Senate had already told the Ombudsman’s office back in 2016 that it had no jurisdiction to dismiss a sitting member of Congress anyway. This legal reality makes Remulla’s initial attempt to enforce the 2016 order not just outdated, but a profound legal and political blunder from the start, solidifying Martires’s devastating public takedown.