3.In the post-audit of disbursement of the municipality, it was observed that cashadvances were utilized for the purchase of spare parts, communication equipment,supplies, other incidental expenses, salaries and travelling expenses and had beeneffected and paid even without passing thru the required pre-audit. Cash advance werealso allowed even when the accountable officers had still unliquidated balance which isinconsistent with the above mentioned regulation.4.Moreover, disbursement voucher submitted for pre-audit which was returned for noted deficiencies were not re-submitted but had already been paid5.The regulation regarding the implementation of selective pre-audit was not properly enforced by the agency despite earlier briefing and/or orientation of the officialconcerned. Consequently, timely review of the transaction could not be readilyundertaken, thus deficiency if any, was similarly, cannot be communicated to the agencyfor immediate adjustment/correction of the official concerned. Efficiency andeffectiveness in the implementation of the program, project and activities of the agencytherefore, were likewise not ascertained at once.6.This was discussed in the Audit Observation Memorandum No. AOM 2009-001dated November 10, 2009, sent to and was duly received by the management. It wasexplained that compliance with COA Circular No. 2009-02 was not fully observed, because they are not yet prepared for its implementation. They assured us however, thatcompliance with the regulations shall be observed in the succeeding transactions.7.We advise the Municipal Mayor to require the accountable officer concern, particularly the head of the internal audit unit to submit for audit action all disbursementvouchers including their supporting documents subject to pre-audit.8.Henceforth, to avoid the sanction provided for in Section 11.2 of the sameCircular, which state that and we quote:9.Section 11.2 – Transactions or claim covered by this circular but not submitted for pre-audit shall be a ground for initiating administrative disciplinary action in accordancewith Section 127 of PD 1445 and Section 55, Title I-B Book V of the RevisedAdministrative Code of 1987, without prejudice to the disallowance of the transaction in post-audit, if warranted, compliance with the above cited regulation shall be strictlyobserved and adhered to.
The municipality allowed the claim for payment/reimbursement of the amount paidto a private law practitioner in violation to Section 2.2 Article IX-D of the 1987Philippine Constitution.
10.COA Circular 98-002 states that “Accordingly and pursuant to the power vested by the constitution, the Commission has the exclusive authority to promulgate accountingand auditing rules and regulations including for the prevention and disallowance of irregular, unnecessary, excessive extravagant and/or unconscionable expenditure or usesof public fund or property”.17