OP ED EDITORIAL & CARTOONS: MANILA- INTERNATIONAL PEOPLE’S TRIBUNAL

EDITORIAL:
The President vs the auditor

While the authority of the President is unchallenged within the executive branch, unless he breaches the law, the authority of the audit commission is equally supreme within its sphere of competence – the examination and audit of accounts pertaining to government revenue and receipts.

The President issued his remarks in the course of answering criticism from former CoA Commissioner Heidi Mendoza, who defended the commission after Duterte made light of its regulations.

Duterte specifically criticized the actions of CoA in punishing procurement anomalies by lower- ranked local officials. He said he was taking the side of lower-ranked officials who were singled out by a CoA circular that punishes procurement anomalies, while letting mayors and governors escape accountability.

He said: “I have seen in a matter of months the same circular convicting (people). When the mayor asks the treasurer and auditor to sign, they will sign. When the bomb ticks off, the mayors and governors are gone.”

He is speaking for people who cannot defend themselves, he said, adding that it was not a criticism.

Duterte told local officials to defy the regulations of CoA after Ilocos Norte Governor Imee Marcos informed him that the state auditor had prohibited the use of cash advances for procuring building materials for residents affected by Typhoon Ompong.

Duterte said he himself does not comply with CoA circulars, which he described as “cock-eyed.” While some government personnel go to jail over a circular, he said others have gotten away scot-free with violating the same rules cited in the same document.

Duterte was so flippant on the issue, he told Ms. Marcos in jest to throw CoA’s auditor down the stairs so the official would not be able to report on government transactions.

This is, of course, scandalous; the President should know better than to disparage the work of a constitutional body as important as the audit commission.

CoA is one of a few government bodies explicitly created by the 1987 Constitution and described as independent in character. Along with the Commission on Elections and the Commission on the Civil Service, CoA was created by Article 1X of the Constitution, which spelled out the authority and mandate of each of the three commissions.

The auditing authority of CoA cannot be gainsaid. The Charter is emphatic in declaring that:

— CoA shall have the power, authority and duty to examine, audit and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of the government;

— CoA shall have the exclusive authority to define the scope of its audit and examination; and that

— No law shall be passed to exempt any entity of the government from the jurisdiction of the audit commission.

The President’s counsel of disobedience impugns CoA’s authority, while at the same time it decries the strictness in the enforcement of regulations.

We think the wise course in this case is for the President and the audit commission to work together in the discharge of their duties. One side can complain; the other side should listen.

This is not a question of who or whose office is more important in our entire government system. The primacy of the President in our constitutional system is well-recognized and respected by all.

The nation’s auditing commission, likewise, occupies a high place in our government system.

A case can be made for saying that the system would not function effectively without the auditing commission in place and fully vigilant.