COA affirms disallowance vs grant of P313.5M PCSO bonuses, allowances

THE Commission on Audit (COA) has denied a petition for review filed by officials of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) that challenged the validity of the Notice of Disallowance (ND) against the payment of P313.51 million to the PCSO Provident Fund in 2012.

COA Commissioners Roland Café Pondoc and Mario G. Lipana upheld the 2015 position of the Corporate Government Sector-Cluster 6 that the fund disbursement was an attempt by the PCSO management to go around the requirement of prior approval by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) or the Office of the President.

COA chairperson Gamaliel A. Cordoba inhibited from reviewing the PCSO petition.

Held liable in the ND were former PCSO general manager Jose Ferdinand Rojas II, PCSO Board chairperson Margarita Juico, Board Members Mabel Mamba, Francisco Joaquin III, Ma. Aleta Tolentino, and Betty Nantes, Budget and Accounting Department OIC manager Dorothy Robles, Administrative Department manager Venus Buado, Internal Audit Department manager Lauro Patiag, Human Resource Management officers Eutiquia Solis and Myrna Malana, and members of the Sweepstakes Employee Union.

The petitioners claimed that the cash release was not an employer (PCSO) contribution but were “special shares” representing additional employee contribution to increase their individual equity in the PCSO Provident Fund.

They likewise argued that the fund disbursement had the post facto approvals of previous Presidents Fidel Ramos in 1997 and 1998, Gloria Arroyo in 2001, and Benigno Aquino III through Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa in 2011.

The COA said both contentions were misplaced, noting that the fund release was neither sourced from any savings nor authorized by the DBM.

“The funds disbursed for PCSO’s ‘special share’ are not shown to have been authorized by the DBM, or that they came from the agency’s savings. This is considered an indirect payment of allowances and benefits without the requisite prior approval of the Office of the President,” the COA en Banc declared.

It also swept aside the contention that post facto approvals by former presidents of similar releases had made subsequent payments valid.

The Commission