You are on page 1of 5
ee Se ee Peet ert tt eX eieleheeara ond trator a arn gel ard errr els ye ed a ee eer tr] Crit ee Laat tet kad reir nronncenray meer ty eerie rte et ey Cr uetet see toon toad penne ener ones ee rae Td re aoe certs ined or designated ina temporary or acing capacty SECTION ONE. PIPPOSE PARIDRETTAN Pune OSE COMPOSITION tistho uncion of he Commission ‘The Commissions composedfa tn Aust to orn to acuracy ran end two, Corman of he records topt end del™ ors . sioner are appointed by the Pres QUALIFICATIONS ident wt the concerto the Com JUALIFICATIONS facacn onapponont Ty 1. NauralBbom citizen tthe Phiip- have a staggered tem of Seven pines years each (ke members of B-Atleast 25 years of age (atte GOMELEG). Reapponment and time of appointment) temporary appointment or deal 3. Ceted Publ’ Accountant palon are absouly prone. (Minimum of 10 years of auditing experience) of Mambec ofthe Ba {Winimum of 10 years inte prac- {oo of tw) At po time shal a of them belong fo the same roe 4. Not have been candidates for any elective postion in tha elec. tions immediately preceding ther appointment. Ib iy Urrough the Com- mission on Audit Uval the people can verity whether theiv money has been properly spent AWS Fung w COA COA has the power as a collegial Appointments to vacancies result: ‘body to decide on any case within ing from cerain causes (death, ros- sty (60) days staring from the ignation, disability or impeachment) data twas submited fr tesoluton, shall only be forthe unexpired por- subjectto review on ceriorariofthe tion ofthe term of the predecessor, ‘Supreme Court. any decision with- but such appointments cannot be ‘outthe corresponding juisdlction isles than the unexpied portion as void ab initio, this will ikewise disrupt the stag- sgering of terms laid down under Ce ee Cerra ner Peeaeeporprsarrirr ment tne ren Mtr err een ets Peele near poearininntet at peer) pee re rt et toes eerie terbannnennirr peri cereenpeny Pereira monn haprmennne te prerelease ire rs ee ae re et ad co een ret mer er tas Preentueianinrreenris rete nee init rmsd eer rr een id eee ern eer eh cra eter es ier penetra t rene te) petod as may be provided by law, preserve the vouchers and other ei ns eter aed Pr entre serene en pero tns Prei retrormenta most eer menapertnatn ene hero ead er a eee poneeeeareereree nace tera reer renee pened SECTION TWO. AND FUNCTIONS 1. To examine and audit al forms of government venues 2.To examine and audit all forms of government expencitures 3. To settle government accounts 4 To detine the scope and techniques for is own auditing procedures 5. To promulgate accounting and auditing rules “including those forthe pre- vention and disalowance of iregular, unnecessary, excessive, extravagant, fr unconscionable expenditures” 6. To decide administrative cases involv JURISDICTION 1. Exclusive power to define its scope of audit, and to estabish what tech- riques to follow. 2. Auditing authority over GOCCS extend ony to chartered institution. 83. Has authonty nat only over account- able officers, but also over aficers who Perform functions related to account- ing, 4. Power to settle government ac- counts has reference only to liquidated claims, not to uniquidated claims, 5. Auditing power however isnot exclu- Sve. Private aust firms has auctting Power over government institutions as well COA’s findings wih rogard to gov- femment agents and officials prevail over private ausitors ing expenditure of public funds POST-AUDIT AUTHORITY 4. Constiutional bodies, commis- sions and offices that have been ‘granted fiscal autonomy under the Consttuton 2. Autonomous colleges and univer- sities 3. Other government-owned and ‘controled corporations and. their subsiciaries| 4. Non-Government entties rece: ing subsidy or equity, directly or ind- rectly, from or through the govern- ment, which are required bylaw or by ‘ranting institution to submt such Audit as @ concition of subsidy or equity als Blue Bar Coconut, Phil Tantuico. ‘The Constiuton formally embodies the long established rule thal vate entiios iho handle government funds or subsidies In trust may bo examined or autod in tho handing of sac funds by government aud fora Inview ofthe considerations, ws apply the principle of direct jrsdicton ‘DBP v COA (COA has the authorsy to post- aud an aleady pre-austed transaction, any deficiency Ht may tind can be fasted and made demandable the proper pate. Laws Eslqo v COA ‘The postaudit author is imitad to determining compliance to govern- ‘ment laws and regulations ke Checking there i an appropriation ‘or budget, inquiring about the legal- ty of transactions, and checking i ‘proper approval and documenta- tion was followed not to determine hich aw is more applicable, Polloso v Gangan (COR has the authory to promt gate rules and procedures, and Conducts avait ‘proceedings In ‘order to prevent the regular, un- ecessary,exoassive, and extava- Gant or unconscionable expend {ue of governmeripubic unas. Aquinaldo v Sandiganbayan COW’ conclusion in is investiga tions only relates to the administra: {vo aspect ofthe mattr of is ac- ountaity but does nt fore: Cove the Ombudsman's authority to lovestigata and determing twhothr theresa crime tbe pros: ecuted tor TFF. Manacop v CA (CA's authonty is limited 1 sating liquidated accounts which are those accounts which may be ad- Justed simply by arithmetical pro- ‘26s. It does not include the power to fix the amount of an undeter- mined debt. Uy v COA The au ary of COA ton ope egw See enere eran oepanote ven at omeranat anes an epee Te 00k dcsen' at tek ret on te poss toe inertty be abearive Tore aTbe pate DBP v COA (2004) ‘Severance of employments a con- dition sine qua non forthe release of reticement benefits. Retirement benefits are not meant to recom- pense employees who are stil in the employ of the government That |s the function of salaries and ather femoluments. Reticement. benefts are in the nature ofa reward grant- 4 by the State to a government ‘employee wo has given the best years of his lite tothe service of his county. CASE LAWS HDMF v COA ‘COA has the power to enjoin ds- Dbursement of funds of any GOCC it itis contrary to law. Nava v Palatlao COA has the exclusive authority to define the scope ofits audit and ex- lamination and to establish the re- quired techniques. and methods; CCOA's findings are accorded not ‘only respect but also finaly, when they are not tainted wih grave abuse of discretion. Gualberto Del Wang v COA “There is nothing in the Constitution that requires the COA to conduct 2 ‘re-auait ofall government trans- factions and for all government agencies. COA may adopt mea- ‘sures, including a temporary or special pre-audit, to correct def Clencies. This disoretion on ts part ‘sn line with the constitutional pro- ‘nouncement thatthe COA has the fexciusive authoriy to define the ‘scope o ts audit and examination. DBP v COA (2006) ‘Administrative agencies are trae 10 tuilize such funds freely as long as they can justfy their use through the mere invocation of laudable purposes. Since the disallowance was made pursuant to the appi- cable law, it cannot be assailed as ‘an act of grave abuse of discretion. Veusoza, Su. v e Under the Constitution, COA is em- powered to examine and audit the Use of funds by an agency of the national government on a pos ‘audit basis. AS such, COA deci- sions regarding procurement of ‘equipment forts own use, is sub- ject to the COA’ auditing rules and ‘egulatons for the prevention and disallowance of iregular, unneces- ‘sary, excessive and extravagant expenditures. Phil. Coconut v Republic ‘The Constitution, by express prow- sion, vests the COA with the re- sponsibiliy for State audit. AS an independent supreme State audi- tor, is audit jurscicion cannot be undermined by any law. COA Ccannat be divested of its consitu- ‘onally-mandated function and be ‘undermined its constitutional inde- pendence. CASE LAWS Caltex v COA (COA has the authority to dany pay- ‘ments and rembursemens. Taxes do not arse trom contacts nor ddopand upon the wil ofthe taxpay- they are imposed by law. Tax: payer may not offset taxes. due from the clams that ne may have against. the ‘government. Taxes anot be the subject of compen Salon because. the government land taxpayer are not mutual red- iors and debtors of each ater and ‘acai for taxes isnot such a dab, demand, contact, 0 judgment as ‘alowed tobe sevot Philippine Aitlines v CO; “The very evil sought tobe avoided inthe cation of the COA the reg: tar, excessive or unconsconable fexpendtures of the government “Thus, thas the power and the duty to exempt contin branches frm fay reguiaton i, obedience to t ‘would ead to those kinds of exces- CIR v COA COA Is not an executive agency. It is one of the three independent Constitutional commissions. Mamaril v Dorvings ‘The COA has he poweroadoptits ‘own measures when doing its duty of examining and managing stato expenses. Slato audit snot lito to the auditing of the accountable officers and the settement of ac: counts, but Includes accounting functions and the adoption in the audited agencies of intemal con trols to $09 tof, among athor mat. tor, tat the correct tes and pen ios de the government ae col tect CSC v Pobre ‘hile the implementation and en- forcement of leave benelits are ‘matters within the functions of the €8C as. the central personnel ‘agency ofthe government, the duty to examine accounts and expendi tures relating. to leave benefits properly pertains to the COA. ‘Weve government expenditures of se of funds is involved, the CSC ‘cannot claim an excusive domain simply because leave matters are ‘also involved. The COA, the CSC ‘and the Commission on Elections are equally pre-eminent in thor re- spective spheres. Nether one may claim dominance over the others,