COA: Suspended, sacked gov’t execs liable for subsequent transactions

A GOVERNMENT official or employee who has been suspended, dismissed or whose appointment has been terminated will be held personally liable for any expenditure or obligation approved after being stripped of authority.

This was clarified by the Commission on Audit in Circular No. 204-008 setting the guidelines for the audit of financial transactions entered or signed by a suspended or dismissed official.

The circular states that vacancies resulting from the dismissal, suspension, termination of appointment, or expiration of term of an official or employee of the national government are covered by the Revised Administrative Code of 1987 while for local government executives, the Local Government Code of 1991 applies.

COA Commissioners Roland Café Pondoc and Mario G. Lipana signed the circular on June 14, 2024 and Chairperson Gamaliel A. Cordoba on June 13, 2024.

The commission noted that there have been instances when suspended or dismissed officials continued to perform the functions of their office including approving financial transactions, signing of contracts and payrolls, and causing payment of obligations despite having lost the authority to do so.

“These acts may constitute usurpation of authority or official functions under Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and may be considered as irregular expenditure of public funds,” the COA said.

The circular invoked Presidential Decree No. 1445 (Government Accounting Code of the Philippines), RA 7160 (Local Government Code of 1991) and Executive Order No. 292 (Revised Administrative Code of 1987).

“Expenditures of government funds or uses of government property in violation of law or regulations shall be a personal liability of the official or employee found to be directly responsible therefor,” the commission said.

Likewise, it warned that other officials or employees who will participate in a financial transaction approved by the suspended or dismissed official will be held jointly liable.

The COA, however, said the payment of regular or recurrent transactions, including the payroll and utilities, may be allowed “without prejudice to the administrative liability of the subject official or employee