G.R. Nos. 237432-33 - JESUS LORETIZO NIEVES, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.R E S O L U T I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly, the accounting division had no basis to take up such fund or the disbursement thereof. [10] On April 11, 2008, the audit team issued a Notice of Suspension No. 08-002-10 (07). It suspended in audit the payment of P4,776,786.00 to Felta due to the non-recording of the notice of cash allotment received and for failing to record its disbursement. In issuing the notice of suspension, the audit team took note of the non-submission of the disbursement voucher and the necessary supporting documents relative thereto. [11] In his verified answer, petitioner averred that the transaction has undergone the required budgeting and accounting examinations. He pointed out that there was no legal impediment to prevent him from releasing the funds to the creditor. To prove his point, he submitted the following documents: (a) Obligation Request No. 07-07-094; (b) Delivery Receipt No. 19134 dated July 20, 2007 with Invoice 3787; (c) Delivery Receipt No. 19135 dated July 20, 2007; (d) Delivery Receipt No. 19136 dated July 20, 2007; (e) Purchase Request reiterating the purpose of distribution under the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) of Congressman Gerry A. Salapudin as requested by the Supply Officer; (f) Bids and Awards Committee Resolution dated April 11, 2006; (g) Purchase Order, Requisition Slip, Inspection and Acceptance Slip dated July 16, 2007 signed by the Supply Officer and the Inspection Officer; (h) Advice of NCA Issued No. 325002-6 (Fund 101) dated August 9, 2007; and (i) Advice to Debit Account. He cited the Bids and Awards (BAC) Resolution dated April 11, 2006 allegedly exempting the PDAF from prior public bidding requirement. He averred that all the transactions under such category should not be covered by RA 9184 or the Government Procurement Reform Act. [12] The state auditors found petitioner's defense without legal basis as neither RA 9184 nor its Implementing Rules and Regulations provided that the PDAF of congressmen is exempted from the requirement of prior bidding in government procurement. In addition, they stressed that there was an outstanding moratorium on the purchase of reference materials pursuant to DepEd Order No. 38 dated June 7, 2007 which reiterated DECS Order No. 25 issued in 1999. Petitioner also failed to submit the distribution list of computers as received by the actual recipients which makes the physical delivery, existence, and receipt thereof doubtful. On October 14, 2008, the team of auditors issued a Notice of Disallowance No. 08-002-101 (07) effectively disallowing in audit the transaction in question. [13] Upon investigation of the Office of the Ombudsman, the genuineness and due execution of the BAC Resolution dated April 11, 2006 was questioned when the concerned signatories denied any participation thereto. The signatories: Pilar J. Rico (Pilar), Harpi A. Sali (Harpi), and Virginia C. Amirrudin (Virginia) executed separate affidavits and position papers with their daily time records and genuin