COA Doctrine

7/29/2019 COA Doctrine

1/4

13. Gualberto Dela Llana v COA

Petitioner claims that the constitutional duty of COA includes the duty to conduct pre-audit and

anchors his argument on Art IX-D. Sec. 2, Par 1.

A pre-audit is an examination of financial transactions before their consumption or payment. It seeks to determine whether thefollowing conditions are present: (1) the proposed expenditure complies with an appropriation law or other specific statutory authority; (2)

sufficient funds are available for the purpose; (3) the proposed expenditure is not unreasonable or extravagant, and the unexpended balance of

appropriations to which it will be charged is sufficient to cover the entire amount of the expenditure; and (4) the transaction is approved by the

proper authority and the claim is duly supported by authentic underlying evidence. It could, among others, identify government agency

transactions that are suspicious on their face prior to their implementation and prior to the disbursement of funds.

There is nothing in the said provision that requires the COA to conduct a pre-audit of all

government transactions and for all government agencies. The only clear reference to this is found in

Section 2, paragraph 1, which provides that a post-audit is mandated for certain government or private

entities with state subsidy or equity and only when the internal control system of an audited entity is

inadequate. In such a situation, the COA may adopt measures, including a temporary or special pre-

audit, to correct the deficiencies. Hence, the conduct of a pre-audit is not a mandatory duty that this

Court may compel the COA to perform. This discretion on its part is in line with the constitutionalpronouncement that the COA has the exclusive authority to define the scope of its audit and

examination.

14. Candelario Versoza v Guillermo Carague

The COA, under the Constitution, is empowered to examine and audit the use of funds

by an agency of the national government on a post-audit basis. For this purpose, the

Constitution has provided that the COA shall have exclusive authority, subject to the

limitations in this Article, to define the scope of its audit and examination, establish the

techniques and methods required therefor, and promulgate accounting and auditing

rules and regulations, including those for the prevention and disallowance of irregular,

unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, or unconscionable expenditures, or uses of

government funds and properties. As such, CDAs decisions regarding procurement of

equipment for its own use, including computers and its accessories, is subject to the

COAs auditing rules and regulations for the prevention and disallowance of irregular,

unnecessary, excessive and extravagant expenditures.


2/4

These identical provisions of P.D. Nos. 961 and 1468 likewise violate

Article IX (D), Section 2(1) of the Constitution, defining the powers and functions

of the Commission on Audit (COA) as a constitutional commission:

Sec. 2. (1) The Commission on Audi t shal l have the power,

authority, and duty to examine, audit, and settle all accounts

pertaini ng to the revenue and receipts of, and expenditur es or uses of

funds and property, owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to, the

Government, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentali ties,

including government-owned and controlled corporations with original

charters, and on a post-audit basis: (a) constitutional bodies,

commissions and offices that have been granted fiscal autonomy under

this Constitution; (b) autonomous state colleges and universities; (c)

other government-owned or controlled corporations and their

subsidiaries;.

[152]

(Emphasis Ours)

A similar provision was likewise previously found in Article XII (D),

Section 2 (1) of the 1973 Constitution, thus:

Section 2. The Commission on Audit shall have the following powers

and functions:

(1) Examine, audit, and settle, in accordance with law and

regulations, all accounts pertain ing to the revenues and receipts

of, and expenditur es or uses of f unds and property, owned orheld in trust by, or pertain ing to, the Government, or any of i ts

subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including

government-owned and controlled corporations; keep the general

accounts of the government and, for such period as may be

provided by law, preserve the vouchers pertaining thereto; and

promulgate accounting and auditing rules and regulations

including those for the prevention of irregular, unnecessary,

excessive, or extravagant expenditures or use of funds and

property.[153] (Emphasis Ours)

The Constitution, by express provision, vests the COA with the

responsibility for State audit. As an independent supreme State auditor, its audit

jurisdiction cannot be undermined by any law. It is clear that it has jurisdiction

over the coconut levy funds, being special public funds. The COA cannot be
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/january2012/177857-58.htm#_ftn154http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/january2012/177857-58.htm#_ftn154http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/january2012/177857-58.htm#_ftn154http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/january2012/177857-58.htm#_ftn155http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/january2012/177857-58.htm#_ftn155http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/january2012/177857-58.htm#_ftn155http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/january2012/177857-58.htm#_ftn155http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/january2012/177857-58.htm#_ftn154


3/4

divested of its constitutionally-mandated function and be undermined its

constitutional independence.


4/4

Call Grace Pulido-Tan

Ms. Gracia Pulido- Tan, since youre the chairman of COA, can you tell us more about its functions?

Nagagawa ba ng coa yan specifically when you were head? (defends COA)

Hold money in public trust? Well, are you aware of the the Fertilizer Fund Scam? Do you know who Janet Napoles

is?

How could we let such atrocious acts go unnoticed? Why did the COA not look into this earlier?

Yun naman pala eh. Hindi naman to mahirap intindihin ah. The Filipino people have been robbed and Chairperson

MARIA GRACIA M. PULIDO TAN, Commissioner HEIDI L. MENDOZA and Commissioner ROWENA V. GUANZONA,

claiming to be staunch advocates of good governance and working tirelessly to identify and root out corruption,

have not yet taken the appropriate actions to resolve such matter.

One of its principal duties is to promulgate accounting and auditing rules and regulations including those for the

prevention and disallowance of irregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant or unconscionable expenditures, or

uses of government funds and properties. Have we allowed the COA to forget about its duties that are expressly

provided for in the Constitution? Is the COA simply for show or display? B pesos would have been impossible to

miss in the auditing process.

I am not angry. I am irate. I am foaming in the mouth. I am homicidal. I am suicidal. I am humiliated, debased,

degraded. I am nauseated. I spit on the face of Janet Napoles and (basta lahat ng senators isa-isang duduraan)

PORK NG INA NYO! BUO NA ANG BALA NA PAPATAY SA INYO.

Documents

COA Doctrine