Case Digest (A.M. No. SB-14-21-J)
Facts:
In the case of Jess Christopher S. Biong versus the Commission on Audit and others, decided on May 28, 2024 under G.R. No. 258510, the dispute arose over the payments made by the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) Region III to Silicon Valley for office supplies, specifically printer inks and toners, purchased under several Purchase Orders (POs) between 2008 and 2009. PhilHealth Region III found that there were no inspection and acceptance reports (IARs) on these deliveries and initially withheld payments. Alternative documents such as certifications from petitioner Biong as the Head of the General Services Unit (GSU), Supplies Withdrawal Slips (SWSs), and Monthly Reports of Supplies and Materials Inventory (MRSMI) were submitted, which led to payments being released to Silicon Valley. Subsequently, petitioner Biong discovered incidents of theft and falsification of SWSs within the GSU. This prompted an investigation that revealed altered documents and unaccounCase Digest (A.M. No. SB-14-21-J)
Facts:
- Parties and Subject Matter
- Petitioner Jess Christopher S. Biong challenges Decision No. 2019-040 of the Commission on Audit (COA).
- The case involves payments made by PhilHealth Region III to Silicon Valley for office supplies (printer inks and toners) under several Purchase Orders (POs).
- Antecedents and Investigation
- In August 2010, PhilHealth Region III’s Comptrollership/Accounting Unit noticed absence of Inspection and Acceptance Reports (IARs) on deliveries from Silicon Valley, withholding payments.
- Acting on advice from State Auditor Trinidad Gozun, PhilHealth accepted alternative documents: a Certification by Biong (GSU Head), Supplies Withdrawal Slips (SWSs), and Monthly Report of Supplies and Materials Inventory (MRSMI).
- Payments for the POs were subsequently released.
- In January 2011, petitioner Biong discovered theft of office supplies and falsification of SWSs in the GSU office.
- An Incident Report was filed recommending formal investigation by the PhilHealth Legal Office.
- Findings and Disallowances by COA
- COA issued Notices of Disallowance (NDs) citing the following irregularities:
- Staggered delivery violating PO terms.
- Lack of authorized inspection (no IARs).
- Documentation irregularities including altered SWSs and unaccounted deliveries.
- Multiple PhilHealth Region III officials, including petitioner Biong, were held civilly liable; Silicon Valley was not held liable.
- Appeals and COA Rulings
- COA Regional Office upheld the disallowances except for exclusion of Angelita Reyes.
- COA Proper affirmed disallowances but excluded various other personnel including Balog, Mamawal, Reyes, Lumba, Quizon, and Marbebe from liability.
- Petitioner Biong was found liable due to "apparent and consistent negligence".
- Notice of Finality of Decision was issued in November 2021.
- Petitioner Biong’s Arguments
- Biong claims non-service of COA decision; only received certified copy in January 2022.
- He contends compliance with audit advice and due diligence in issuing certifications.
- Theft and falsification occurred prior to his tenure and were discovered and reported during his term.
- COA’s disallowance grounds are flawed: contractual delivery violation does not justify disallowance, procedural lapses are internal matters, and government suffered no loss since supplies were delivered.
- Argues COA violated his rights to due process and speedy trial.
- COA’s Position
- COA maintains Biong’s gross negligence since he certified delivery without proper IARs and allowed falsified documents.
- Maintains disallowance to protect faithful adherence to financial laws.
Issues:
- Whether the COA committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in upholding the Notices of Disallowance that found petitioner Biong liable for irregular payments to Silicon Valley due to:
- Delay in delivery.
- Lack of Inspection and Acceptance Reports (IARs).
- Falsification of Supplies Withdrawal Slips (SWSs).
- Whether petitioner Biong’s civil liability for the disallowances is valid given the circumstances and evidence.
- Whether the COA violated petitioner Biong’s constitutional right to due process and speedy disposition of cases.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)