Title
Miguel Rene A. Dominguez vs. Commission on Audit, Michael G. Aguinaldo in his capacity as Chairperson
Case
G.R. No. 256285
Decision Date
Aug 3, 2021
Sarangani Province's use of intelligence funds for non-intelligence activities (e.g., barangay tanod training, firearm registration) was disallowed by COA; SC upheld disallowance, citing non-compliance with DILG rules. Officers liable for P4.68M refund.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 256285)

Facts of the Case

In 2009, Dominguez approved the Sarangani Province Local Government Security Plan, aimed at enhancing intelligence operations in response to escalating incidents in the province. The provincial government allocated funds for various activities, including training for civilian volunteers and the registration of unlicensed firearms. To cover expenditures surpassing budget limitations set by DILG Memorandum Circular No. 99-65, Dominguez submitted requests for exemptions, which were granted for 2009 and 2010. However, the COA later flagged expenditures from 2011 and 2012 as irregular, leading to the issuance of Notices of Disallowance for 3.3 million and 1.38 million pesos, respectively.

Notices of Disallowance

The COA's Notices of Disallowance highlighted that the expenditures were improperly charged to intelligence and confidential funds rather than peace and order funds, as mandated by MC No. 99-65. Specific activities disallowed included training for barangay tanods, firearms inventory, and conflict transformation training associated with peace initiatives, which the COA deemed related to peace and order activities rather than intelligence operations.

Appeals and COA's Ruling

In challenging the Notices of Disallowance, Dominguez argued that the activities conformed to MC No. 99-65 and that his reliance on previous approvals from the DILG constituted good faith. The COA found these justifications insufficient, emphasizing that the activities fell outside the permissible uses of intelligence funds. The application of the ejusdem generis rule was deemed misplaced by the COA since the enumeration in MC No. 99-65 did not extend to activities aimed at peace and order.

Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration

Dominguez filed a motion for reconsideration, reiterating his claims of good faith and prior approvals. However, the COA rejected the motion, asserting that prior approvals did not negate the necessity of obtaining exemptions for subsequent fiscal years, particularly noting the lack of approval from the DILG for 2011 and 2012.

Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court affirmed COA’s decisions, ruling that no grave abuse of discretion was evident in COA's actions. It upheld the assessment that expenditures related to peace and order should not be charged to intelligence funds, emphasizing the clear limitations set out in MC No. 99-65. The court concluded that Dominguez acted with gross negligence in disbursing the funds without prior DILG approval, thereby affirming the liability for returning P4,680,000.00. The co

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.