Revoke pork barrel report

The report was selective and partisan since the release of the audit report was delayed and it focused on the opposition and nonadministration solons.

Commission on Audit (CoA) chairperson Jose Calida should support the petition with the Supreme Court to nullify the Special Audit of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) conducted from 15 June 2010 to 13 September 2012.

The CoA Special Audit Report 2012-3 was released on 16 August 2013.

The audit was bad enough for being faulty. The audit report was worse for being crude. The release of the report was also selective and partisan.

The audit planning and execution were done by one person and not by the collegial body in violation of the Constitution.

It was crude as it violated the long-honored practice of courtesy and fair play by not addressing the report to the head of the agency audited and doing away with the basic requirement in the audit process, which is the exit conference in the spirit of fair play.

The report was selective and partisan since the release of the audit report was delayed, and it focused on the opposition and non-administration solons.

Never in the over 116-year history of CoA has its standing as an institution been placed in such an embarrassing and difficult situation, so tainted with the perception of incompetence, bias and partiality as it had been in the last five years; never in the past had it ever occurred that both chairperson and commissioner of the audit commission behaved with such ignorance of the constitutional provisions on the powers and functions of CoA, auditing laws, rules and regulations; such arrogance, such impunity of abuse beyond the bounds of ethical norms and cynicism.

And yet for the authentic rule of law to prevail, the public must have absolute trust and confidence in the competence, sense of justice, probity, integrity and impartiality of CoA as a collegial body.

To have an auditor, much more CoA chairperson and commissioner, who do not live up to the expectation of being like Caesar’s wife — beyond reproach — is to fatally impede the ability of the audit institution to function and exercise properly the audit process as mandated by the Constitution, and to submit a report that is credible, fair and impartial.

The five-year period from 2011 to 2015, or the administration of Chairperson Grace Pulido-Tan and Commissioner Heidi Mendoza may be characterized as the blackest page in the history of government auditing in the Philippines when the audit process was exercised in violation of the Constitution, the auditing code, rules and regulations, and the audit reports were delayed, selective and partisan.

This was the time when the good name and reputation of innocent people were besmirched and institutions were either damaged and/or completely destroyed.

There had been impunity of abuse, disregard of fully established and respected auditing rules and regulations, hasty and imprudent issuance of poorly thought out and crudely crafted audit memoranda and circulars that were found by men in government, private sector and academe to be unconstitutional, unsound, illegal and conflicting.

The Pulido-Tan-Mendoza tandem violated Section 126 of Presidential Decree 1445: “To respect, protect, and preserve the independence of CoA”; Section 54: “To maintain complete independence, impartiality and objectivity… in the performance of their duties”; and to present in their audit report “Factual matters accurately, completely and fairly.”

Under the Code of Ethics for Government Auditors, both Pulido-Tan and Mendoza were liable for disciplinary action under the Civil Service Law without prejudice to the corresponding action under appropriate penal laws as may be warranted in the premises.

“

The fiveyear period from 2011 to 2015, or the administration of Chairperson Grace PulidoTan and Commissioner Heidi Mendoza, may be characterized as the blackest page in the history of government auditing in the Philippines.