The apocalypse of good governance?

Part 4 of our series on the Office of the Ombudsman reveals the similarly poor to modest records of service of Gutierrez and her three predecessors from 1988, namely Conrado M.Vasquez, Aniano A. Desierto, and Simeon V. Marcelo. All four chiefs of the Office had launched their stints as the nation’s top graft-busters with firm, elaborate, hopeful reforms to fight corruption.

When the criticisms trickled in – invariably over low conviction rates, perceived partiality toward the presidents who appointed them, and sheer failure to cope with tremendous case loads and hail crooks to jail – all four trudged on. What they ended serving up, though, were not more and better results, but more excuses (Desierto and Gutierrez doing so more than the other two).

By all indications, and by the results of their work while in office, all four Ombudsmen without exception have been encumbered by the initially close personal and political ties they have had with the Presidents who appointed them.

It comes with a sidebar story that looks at two Commission on Audit reports on the Ombudsman in 2008 and 2009 raise questions about how the Ombudsman spends taxpayers’ money.