Sara deprived of due process: Opo

The testimony of Commission on Audit State Auditor Xylene Del Campo in the impeachment trial revealed one glaring fact:  in blatant violation of rules, COA issued a Notice of Disallowance without giving Vice President Sara Duterte a chance to explain her side as required by COA’s procedures on due process.

Read the exchange between the presiding officer, Senator-Judge Chiz Escudero, and Del Ocampo:

Presiding Officer Chiz Escudero: Ma’am Xylene, so dahil binigay di umano kay Lachica ni Gina Acosta, dinis-allow nyo na lang?

Del Ocampo: Yes, po, dahil direct violation po ito ng Joint Circular.

Escudero: Subalit dahil hindi yan dumaan sa Notice of Suspension, inisyu nyo yong Notice of Disallowance na hindi binigyan ng pagkakataon na sumagot muna at magpaliwanag ang OVP. Wala pa po sila …. Ngayon pa lang kong sakasakaling mag-aapeal sila?

Del Ocampo: Opo.

Escudero: So you have not heard the side of the vice president or the OVP with respect to what you heard Gina Acosta say under oath in house hearing. Wala pa po silang response doon.

Del Ocampo: Wala pa po. Doon na lang po sa appeal.

Escudero: Doon na lang po, so inisyu nyo nya na hindi pa narinig yong panig nila.

Del Ocampo: Opo.

The COA procedure is as follows: First, after the auditor’s evaluation, if it is found that receipts or other documents are lacking in the liquidation on agency’s funds, the auditor issues an Audit Observation Memorandum (AOM). At this stage the agency will have the chance to submit additional documentations. There is no finding of failure to liquidate yet at this point.

Second, if the issue remains unresolved, the auditor issues a Notice of Suspension. At this stage the agency is again given an opportunity to be heard and to explain how the funds were used.

Third, if the issue remains unresolved, that is when a Notice of Disallowance is issued. The auditor’s findings are only recommendatory. The commission has the final say.

The agency has 180 days or 6 months to appeal to the commission which may affirm, modify or reverse the Notice of disallowance. The Motion for Reconsideration is also an available remedy.

In the case of the Office of the Vice President (OVP), after the issuance of the AOM, the COA issued the Notice of Disallowance. It skipped the supposed Notice of suspension. Despite this expedited process, the OVP still has remedies to it. This was clarified in the exchange between Sen.  Erwin Tulfo and the same witness.

Sen. Tulfo: So yun po ang inaantay po ninyo?

Xylene: Sa OVP po, opo.

Sen. Tulfo: So hanggng ngayon inaantay po ninyo?

Xylene: Opo dahil may mga remedies pa po sila.

The witness’s answer clearly indicates that there is still no Notice of Finality of Decision regarding the liquidation of the OVP’s confidential funds because remedies within COA remain available to the OVP. So why has the matter reached the impeachment trial stage? Why did they not wait for COA’s final decision?

With these revelations in the impeachment proceedings that are seen by the public, such questions are now inevitable in the minds of ordinary Filipinos.