COA ‘disallowance’ final: OVP must return P73M
Vice President Sara Duterte and two other officials of the Office of the Vice President (OVP) are obliged to return the P73.287 million in confidential funds that the OVP spent in 11 days in December 2022 without proper documentation, according to state auditors.
The Commission on Audit (COA) on Monday “affirmed with finality” the notice of disallowance (ND) it issued on the OVP’s confidential expenses on Aug. 8, 2024, and denied the respondents’ motion for reconsideration.
“Disbursement of large public funds deserves no less: taxpayers’ money should always be spent with paramount consideration of full transparency and reasonable budget allocation,” it said in a 15-page resolution.
“Indubitably, these cannot be wantonly sacrificed on the altar of exigency inasmuch as reckless handling and accounting of public funds have no place in a government that endeavor to keep inviolate the trust of the people.”
It’s the latest setback for the embattled 48-year-old Duterte, who is being tried by the Senate impeachment court on allegations of misuse of confidential funds, among others. Yet to face her accusers in court, she has maintained in public statements that there was “no misuse of any funds.”
The P73.28 million forms part of the P612.5 million in confidential funds that the Vice President had been accused of misusing, the subject of one of the four articles of impeachment filed against her.
While it has yet to receive a copy of the resolution, the OVP said in a statement that it anticipated the “possibility of this decision” and “has prepared to respond through the appropriate legal and institutional channels.”
The COA earlier called for the immediate return of the funds, unless the Supreme Court issues a temporary restraining order.
Apart from Duterte, also cited as liable were the OVP’s special disbursing officer Gina Acosta and chief accountant Julieta Villadelrey.
The COA said that the “obligation to refund” the disallowed expenses “falls upon those directly responsible,” which includes the officials who approved, authorized and certified the transaction, as well as those who received the confidential funds.
The commission issues an ND for government transactions that are either “illegal, irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant or unconscionable.”
In this case, the ND covered confidential expenses made by the OVP over 11 days, from Dec. 21 to Dec. 31, 2022, consisting of P69.78 million for “rewards” and P3.5 million for the purchase of tables, chairs, desktops, computers, and printers.
The COA flagged the P69.78 million after the OVP failed to submit the necessary documents proving the successful conduct of its information-gathering or surveillance activities that warranted the payment of rewards to informers.
These rewards were given in the form of cash, medicines and goods.
No hint of info gathering
On the other hand, payments for tables, chairs, desktop computers and printers, amounting to P3.5 million, were also charged to the OVP’s confidential funds even though it was not specified that the items were used for confidential operations or activities, the agency noted.
According to the COA, the activities reported by the OVP were “observed to be governance in nature” and had no semblance of any information gathering or surveillance activities related to national security or peace and order.
The COA upheld its August 2024 ND in a resolution on April 10 this year. In that resolution, the COA said the OVP submitted an accomplishment report that merely included a list of the confidential expenses and a general statement that the activities were “100% implemented without any untoward security-related incident.”
No breakdown of the confidential expenses and a narration of the success of the information gathering or surveillance activities were presented, it added.
On May 21, Duterte, Acosta and Villadelrey filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that the ND was “facially deficient” because it did not specify whether the P73.29-million confidential funds are considered “illegal, irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant or unconscionable.”
‘Bad faith’
They claimed that the COA “compounded this error” by failing to explain how the nonsubmission of documents and lack of specifics in the payments of confidential funds “constitute any of the prohibited expenditures.”
Moreover, they noted that the ND and the decision affirming it were “silent on any finding of any loss of public funds or prejudice to the government.”
In its Oct. 5 resolution, the COA reiterated that the OVP failed to submit documents proving the success of its activities, as part of its compliance with the joint circular on the use, accounting, and documentation of confidential and intelligence funds.
The state auditor said the payment of rewards to informers must have supporting documents, as required by the circular.
Under a 2015 joint circular issued by the COA together with the defense, budget and interior departments, confidential funds may only be used for acquiring information for national security purposes and for paying informants. All disbursements must also be properly documented.
The COA also noted that the OVP had been instructed to submit the necessary documents and make the necessary justifications in response to the ND, audit observation memorandum, and notice of suspension, but to no avail.
It said the OVP’s noncompliance “is equivalent to gross negligence amounting to bad faith.”
It added that “when disbursements of government funds are not properly documented or supported by documents,” it can be considered “disbursed to the prejudice or damage to the government.” —WITH A REPORT FROM INQUIRER RESEARCH
******
Get real-time news updates: inqnews.net/inqviber
