FIRST DIVISION
G.R. No. 230132, January 19, 2021
MANUEL A. TIO, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
G.R. No. 230252
LOLITA I. CADIZ, Petitioner, v. HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN AND THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
D E C I S I O N
PERALTA, C.J.:
At bench are two appeals1 assailing the Decision2 dated November 29, 2016 and the Resolution3 dated February 27, 2017 of the Sandiganbayan in SB-13-CRM-0575. In the assailed decision, petitioners Manuel A. Tio (Tio) and Lolita I. Cadiz (Cadiz), who are both public officers, were convicted of violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 3019, otherwise known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. On the other hand, the assailed Resolution, upheld that conviction.
The antecedents are not disputed.
In the year 2008, or sometime prior or subsequent hereto (sic), in Luna, Isabela, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, [Tio] and [Cadiz], public officers being then the Municipal Mayor and Municipal Accountant, respectively of Luna, Isabela, while in the performance of their official functions and in abuse thereof, acting with manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence, conspiring and confederating with one another, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and criminally cause undue injury to the government and give unwarranted benefit to [Double A] owned by a relative of [Tio], by awarding to the said [Double A] the project concreting of the One-Kilometer Barangay Harana-Mambabanga Road in Luna, Isabela without the required public bidding and causing the partial payment in the sum of Two Million Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P2,500,000.00) to the said [Double A] sans the necessary documents, thereby depriving the Municipality of Luna, Isabela the opportunity to get the most advantageous offer for the said project to the damage and prejudice of the government.Tio and Cadiz entered separate pleas of "Not Guilty" to the above accusation. Trial ensued in due course.
CONTRARY TO LAW.14
WHEREFORE, accused [Tio] and [Cadiz] are found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Sec. 3(e) of [RA] No. 3019, and are accordingly sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of six (6) years and one month as minimum, to eight (8) years as maximum, with perpetual disqualification from holding public office.The Sandiganbayan predicated the convictions upon the following findings:
SO ORDERED.15
SECTION 3. Corrupt practices of public officers. - In addition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law, the following shall constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful:The three elements of Section 3 (e) of R.A. No. 3019 are: (1) that the accused is a public officer discharging administrative, judicial, or official functions, or a private individual acting in conspiracy with such public officer; (2) that he acted with: (a) manifest partiality, (b) evident bad faith, or (c) gross inexcusable negligence; and (3) that his action caused (a) any undue injury to any party, including the government, or (b) gave any private party unwarranted benefits, advantage, or preference in the discharge of his functions.26
x x x x
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. This provision shall apply to officers and employees of offices or government corporations charged with the grant of licenses or permits or other concessions.
SEC. 444. The Chief Executive: Powers, Duties, Functions and Compensation. -When Tio ordered the construction of the road, approved the Disbursement Voucher, and signed the check for procurement of construction material and rent of construction equipment, Tio exercised his general supervision and control as Municipal Mayor.
x x x x
(b) For efficient, effective and economical governance the purpose of which is the general welfare of the municipality and its inhabitants pursuant to section 16 of this Code, the municipal mayor shall:
(1) Exercise general supervision and control over all programs, projects, services, and activities of the municipal government, and in this connection, shall:
x x x x
(vi) Upon authorization by the Sangguniang Bayan, represent the municipality in all its business transactions and sign on its behalf all bonds, contracts, and obligations, and such other documents made pursuant to law or ordinance;
SECTION 474. Qualifications, Powers and Duties. -Cadiz acted in her capacity as Municipal Accountant, when she certified the availability of budgetary allotment, and reviewed supporting documents to be attached to the Disbursement Voucher.
x x x x
(b) The accountant shall take charge of both the accounting and internal audit services of the local government unit concerned and shall:
x x x x
(4) Certify to the availability of budgetary allotment to which expenditures and obligations may be properly charged;
(5) Review supporting documents before preparation of vouchers to determine completeness of requirements;
There is "manifest partiality" when there is a clear, notorious, or plain inclination or predilection to favor one side or person rather than another. "Evident bad faith" connotes not only bad judgment but also palpably and patently fraudulent and dishonest purpose to do moral obliquity or conscious wrongdoing for some perverse motive or ill will. "Evident bad faith" contemplates a state of mind affirmatively operating with furtive design or with some motive or self-interest or ill will or for ulterior purposes. Gross inexcusable negligence refers to negligence characterized by the want of even the slightest care, acting or omitting to act in a situation where there is a duty to act, not inadvertently but willfully and intentionally, with conscious indifference to consequences insofar as other persons may be affected.28 (Citations omitted)
Manifest partiality and gross inexcusable negligence. |
[P]etitioner was grossly negligent in all the purchases that were made under his watch. Petitioner's admission that the canvass sheets sent out by de Jesus to the suppliers already contained his signatures because he pre-signed these forms only proved his utter disregard of the consequences of his actions. Petitioner also admitted that he knew the provisions of RA 7160 on personal canvass but he did not follow the law because he was merely following the practice of his predecessors. This was an admission of a mindless disregard for the law in a tradition of illegality. This is totally unacceptable, considering that as municipal mayor, petitioner ought to implement the law to the letter. As local chief executive, he should have been the first to follow the law and see to it that it was followed by his constituency. Sadly, however, he was the first to break it.30There was gross inexcusable negligence on Tio's part when he approved the Disbursement Voucher despite the lack of supporting documents. Through this, he showed his indifference as to the repercussions of his act because it was done with disregard to the requirements under the law. Being the local chief executive and having administrative control of the local funds, it is his duty to ensure that public funds are disbursed only after having complied with the law.
Tio awarded the contract to Double A without public bidding. |
Sec. 48. Alternative Methods. - Subject to the prior approval of the Head of the Procuring Entity or his duly authorized representative, and whenever justified by the conditions provided in this Act, the Procuring Entity may, in order to promote economy and efficiency, resort to any of the following alternative methods of Procurement:Section 53 of R.A. No. 9184 allows Negotiated Procurement in the following instances:cralawred
x x x x
e. Negotiated Procurement - a method of Procurement that may be resorted under the extraordinary circumstances provided for in Section 53 of this Act and other instances that shall be specified in the IRR, whereby the Procuring Entity directly negotiates a contract with a technically, legally and financially capable supplier, contractor or consultant.
Sec. 53. Negotiated Procurement. - x x x xIn the 2016 Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. No. 9184, the scope of Negotiated Procurement is broadened to include other modes of negotiated procurement, and to emphasize that negotiated procurement is a method of procurement of Goods, Infrastructure Projects:cralawred
- In case of two (2) failed biddings as provided in Section 35 hereof;
- In case of imminent danger to life or property during a state of calamity, or when time is of the essence arising from natural or man-made calamities or other causes where immediate action is necessary to prevent damage to or loss of life or property, or to restore vital public services, infrastructure facilities and other public utilities;
- Take-over of contracts, which have been rescinded or terminated for causes provided for in the contract and existing laws, where immediate action is necessary to prevent damage to or loss of life or property, or to restore vital public services, infrastructure facilities and other public utilities;
- Where the subject contract is adjacent or contiguous to an on-going infrastructure project, as defined in the IRR: Provided, however, That the original contract is the result of a Competitive Bidding x x x; or,
- Subject to the guidelines specified in the IRR, purchases of Goods from another agency of the government, such as the Procurement Service of the DBM, which is tasked with a centralized procurement of commonly used Goods for the government in accordance with Letters of Instruction No. 755 and Executive Order No. 359, series of 1989.
SEC. 53. Negotiated Procurement. - Negotiated Procurement is a method of procurement of Goods, Infrastructure Projects and Consulting services, whereby the Procuring Entity directly negotiates a contract with a technically, legally and financially capable supplier, contractor or consultant in any of the following cases:Under Section 53.2 of the IRR, in emergency cases, the Procuring Entity (Municipality of Luna), has the option to undertake Infrastructure Projects through: (a) negotiated procurement, or (b) by administration. The implementation of an infrastructure is 'by administration' if it is "carried out under the administration and supervision of the concerned agency, through its own personnel."36
53.1. Two Failed Bidding. x x x x
53.2. Emergency Cases. In case of imminent danger to life or property during a state of calamity, or when time is of the essence arising from natural or man-made calamities or other causes where immediate action is necessary to prevent damage to or loss of life or property, or to restore vital public services, infrastructure facilities and other public utilities. In the case of Infrastructure Projects, the Procuring Entity has the option to undertake the project through negotiated procurement or by administration or, in high security risk areas, through the AFP.
53.3. Take-Over of Contracts. x x x x
53.4. Adjacent or Contiguous. x x x x
53.5. Agency-to-Agency. x x x x
53.6. Scientific, Scholarly or Artistic Work, Exclusive Technology and Media Services. x x x x
53.7. Highly Technical Consultants. x x x x
53.8. Defense Cooperation Agreement. x x x x
53.9. Small Value Procurement. x x x x
53.10. Lease of Real Property and Venue. x x x x
53.11. NGO Participation. x x x x
53.12. Community Participation. x x x x
53.13. United Nations Agencies, International Organizations or International Financing Institutions35
In order for an infrastructure project to be undertaken by administration, the project must be included in the Annual Procurement Plan (APP). Under GPPB Resolution No. 20-2015, it cited Executive (EO) No. 662 series of 2007, as amended. EO No. 662, as amended, was the applicable law at the time when the road concreting project was perfected, and when purchase of construction materials and rent of construction equipment were undertaken by the Municipality. It prescribes the contents of the APP: (i) name of project/procurement; (ii) project management office or end-user unit; (iii) general description of the project/procurement; (iv) procurement methods to be adopted; (v) time schedule for each procurement activity; (vi) source of funds; and (vii) budgetary estimate.37
3.0 Conditions and Requirements for the use of "By Administration" 3.1 Projects undertaken by Administration shall be included in the approved Annual Procurement Plan (APP) of the procuring entity concerned. x x x x 3.2 To undertake projects by administration, the implementing agency must: a. have a track record of having completed, or supervised a project, by administration or by contract, similar to and with a cost of at least fifty percent (50%) of the project at hand, and b. own the tools and construction equipment to be used or have access to such tools and equipment owned by other government agencies. The criteria for evaluating the track record and capability of implementing agencies shall be in accordance with the guidelines to be issued by the Department of Public Works and Highways in consultation with the leagues enumerated under the Local Government Code. 3.3 Any project costing Five Million (P5,000,000) or less may be undertaken by administration or force account by the implementing agency concerned. x x x x PROVIDED, that prior authority shall be obtained from the Secretary of Public Works and Highways, if the project cost is Five Million (P5,000,000) up to Twenty Million (P20,000,000), or from the President of the Philippines, upon the favorable recommendation of the Secretary of Public Works and Highways, if the project cost is more than Twenty Million (P20,000,000). 3.4 No contractor shall be used by the procuring entity, directly or indirectly for works undertaken by administration. 3.5 Procurement of tools and construction equipment shall be subject to the rules on public bidding. 3.6 For projects funded by the National Government and implemented by a Local Government Unit, the latter shall be required to post the necessary warranty security in accordance with Section 62 of RA 9184 and its IRR-A. 3. 7 The manual labor component of projects undertaken by administration may be undertaken in-house by the implementing agency concerned, by job-order or through the pakyaw contracting system. In-house labor is undertaken if the workers are employees or personnel occupying regular plantilla positions in the implementing agency. Job-order contracts shall be governed by relevant Commission on Audit (COA) and/or Civil Service Commission (CSC) rules.
Based on the exhibits submitted by the prosecution and the defense, the requirements under Section 3 of GPPB Resolution No. 018-2006 were not met. First, there was no APP submitted before the court. The 2008 Infrastructure Project of Luna, Isabela (Exhibit 2),40 is not the APP contemplated by law because it merely enumerated the infrastructure projects to be undertaken in 2008 by the Municipality. Second, the Municipality did not show that it has a track record of having completed, or supervised a project by administration or by contract, similar to and with a cost of at least 50% of the project on hand. Third, since the Municipality rented construction equipment from Double A, the requirement that the former must either own the tools and construction equipment to be used, or has access to such tools and equipment owned by other government agencies, was not met. Fourth, there was no showing that a prior authority from the DPWH was secured for the road concreting project which costs P5,000,000.00.
Exhibit 1 -Joint Counter-Affidavit of Tio, Fernandez and Cadiz dated September 22, 2009 Exhibit 2 -2008 Infrastructure Projects of Luna, Isabela Exhibit 3 -Memorandum of Agreement dated January 23, 2008 Exhibit 4 -Message from the Office of the Governor Exhibit 5 -Handwritten note of the Provincial Governor dated April 3, 2008 Exhibit 6 -Certificate of Completion of the Project Engineer dated December 16, 2008 Exhibit 7 -Certificate of Acceptance dated December 16, 2008 of Ballesteros Exhibit 8 -Certificate of Acceptance dated December 16, 2008 of Calaoagan Exhibit 9 -Letter dated March 2, 2009 Exhibit 10 -Inspection Report for Infrastructure Projects dated March 31, 2009 Exhibit 11 -1st Indorsement dated March 10, 2009 Exhibit 12 -2nd Indorsement dated March 10, 2009 Exhibit 13 -3rd Indorsement dated April 13, 2009 Exhibit 14 -4th Indorsement dated April 14, 2009 Exhibit 15 -Letter dated April 17, 200939
The road concreting project started around two months after the signing of the month, and the payment of P2,500,000.00 was only paid after 80% of the road concreting project was finished:cralawred
Q: How were the materials purchased, Mr. Witness? A: It was purchased directly to the supplier, sir. Q: At that time, who was the supplier, Mr. Witness? A: Many suppliers but only one gave us credit at that time. x x x x Q: Can you please tell us the reason why was the purchase made directly to Double A, and why it did not pass through the municipality pre-qualification bids and awards committee? A: During that time, sir, the Assistance Fund that was promised by the Honorable Governor did not reach the municipality of Luna. Q: Now, because of this delay of the release of funds, what did you do to secure the necessary materials that are important to the project? A: We asked the supplier if he can give us credit for us to proceed to administer the 1 km project. Q: You said that [it] was only Double A Gravel and Sand who agreed to provide the materials on credit? A: Yes, sir.48
Tio, knowing fully well that public bidding could not be conducted because the municipality did not have the funds, still proceeded with the road concreting project. Neither was there an explanation for the haste in implementing the project, nor was it shown that construction of the road was urgently needed. There was nothing in the MOA requiring that the project be finished within a certain period or a specific date.
Q: Now when did the project start? A: Actually Governor Grace Padaca after signing the [MOA] with the Hon. Governor around two (2) months after the signing of the MOA. x x x x Q: When did the money actually reach the municipality of Luna? A: After eighty (80%) [was] finished. Q: Approximately what month and what year was that? A: I cannot remember the month but the year is 2008. Q: Now, do you have any proof that this money was disbursed or was released to the municipality of Luna, Isabela by Gov. Padaca? A: Yes, it was deposited to the account of the LGU. Q: Aside from the actual deposit, was there any written communication coming from Gov. Padaca evidencing that the money was released? A: Yes, sir; there was a short note signed by Gov. Padaca.49
SEC. 21. Advertising and Contents of the Invitation to Bid. - In line with the principle of transparency and competitiveness, all Invitations to Bid for contracts under competitive bidding shall be advertised by the Procuring Entity in such manner and for such length of time as may be necessary under the circumstances, in order to ensure the widest possible dissemination thereof, such as, but not limited to, posting in the Procuring Entity's premises, in newspapers of general circulation, the G-EPS and the website of the Procuring Entity, if available. The details and mechanics of implementation shall be provided in the IRR to be promulgated under this Act.Through the public bidding and the publication of the invitation to bid, the Municipality could have determined if there were other qualified suppliers. The absence of public bidding renders the contract between the Municipality and Double A void.
Tio caused the partial payment of P2,500,000.00 despite absence or lack of supporting documents. |
SEC. 344. Certification on, and Approval of, Vouchers. - No money shall be disbursed unless the local budget officer certifies to the existence of appropriation that has been legally made for the purpose, the local accountant has obligated said appropriation, and the local treasurer certifies to the availability of funds for the purpose. Vouchers and payrolls shall be certified to and approved by the head of the department or office who has administrative control of the fund concerned, as to validity, propriety, and legality of the claim involved. Except in cases of disbursements involving regularly recurring administrative expenses such as payrolls for regular or permanent employees, expenses for light, water, telephone and telegraph services, remittances to government creditor agencies such as GSIS, SSS, LBP, DBP, National Printing Office, Procurement Service of the DBM and others, approval of the disbursement voucher by the local chief executive himself shall be required whenever local funds are disbursed.Mayor Tio approved the Disbursement Voucher and caused the payment of P2,500,000.00 to Double A despite the incompleteness of the voucher, and the supporting documents.
In addition, by further examination of the Disbursement Voucher, Tio could have discovered the incomplete supporting documents.
Q: Auditor Reyes, you mentioned a while ago that when you audited this specific disbursement voucher, there were no attachments to it? A: Yes, ma'am. Q: Can you tell the Honorable Court what are the necessary attachments to a disbursement voucher? A: As third party liability, Double A Gravel and Sand, there should be a purchase request, purchase order, acceptance or inspection report. Q: In this disbursement voucher that you identified a while ago, what were the documents, if any, were attached to the same? A: No attachment, ma'am. Q: What is the significance of the said absence of the said necessary attachment? A: This is [an] irregular transaction.52
SEC. 338. Prohibitions Against Advance Payments. - No money shall be paid on account of any contract under which no services have been rendered or goods delivered.Even if there was a delivery of the construction materials, and the road concreting project was finished, it was not shown that there was a delivery of construction materials prior to the approval of the Disbursement Voucher.
Cadiz signed the Disbursement Voucher despite the question mark in place of the entries in the voucher, and even if the allotment had not been obligated. Since there was no proof that she made any objection as to her signing the voucher, there is a presumption that she voluntarily signed the voucher. When she made the certification, she participated in the unlawful disbursement of public funds.
Q: What is the significance of this signature appearing in this portion of the voucher? A: That the payment was received by the supplier. Q: In the lower portion of the voucher, Auditor Reyes, what are the entries stated in the journal entry voucher portion? A: Question mark po, kasi walang entry. x x x x Pros. Hernandez: Q: What is the significance Auditor Reyes of the absence of the entry in this portion of the voucher? A: It was not obligated, ma'am.53
[A]s the City Accountant, foremost of her duties is to ensure that the local funds out of which the salaries of local government employees would be paid are properly accounted for. As Cesa implicitly argued, the creation of the Office of the City Accountant serves an important function of pre-audit in the chain of processing cash advances of individual paymasters.In this case, Cadiz should not have signed the Disbursement Voucher, in the absence or lack of supporting documents. By doing so, there was unlawful disbursement. As a result, there was failure on the part of Cadiz to perform her duty as Municipal Accountant, which is to ensure that public funds are disbursed only after the requirements of law are complied with. She was remiss of her duty as Municipal Accountant,56 constitutes gross inexcusable negligence.
A pre-audit is an examination of financial transactions before their consumption or payment; a pre-audit seeks to determine, among others, that the claim is duly supported by authentic underlying pieces of evidence. If the setup then prevailing in the Cebu City government directly conflicts with the COA regulations, Jaca should have, at the very least, informed the City Mayor of the risk in the process of disbursement of local funds or at least she should have set up an internal audit system - as was her duty - to check against possible malversation of funds by the paymaster.55 (Citations omitted)
Undue injury in the context of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 should be equated with the civil law concept of "actual damage." Unlike in actions for torts, undue injury in Sec. 3(e) cannot be presumed even after a wrong or a violation of a right has been established. Its existence must be proven as one of the elements of the crime. In fact, the causing of undue injury, or the giving of any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence constitutes the very act punished under this section. Thus, it is required that the undue injury be specified, quantified and proven to the point of moral certainty.58In this case, the Court finds that the prosecution was not able to prove that the government, or any party suffered undue injury. Despite the irregularities in the procurement of construction materials and rent of construction equipment, Tio was able to prove that the road concreting project was completed.59 There was actual delivery of the construction materials, and rent of construction equipment, which facilitated the completion of the road concreting project. For these reasons, Tio and Cadiz did not cause undue injury to the government or to any party.
The word "unwarranted" means lacking adequate or official support; unjustified; unauthorized or without justification or adequate reason. "Advantage" means a more favorable or improved position or condition; benefit, profit or gain of any kind; benefit from some course of action. "Preference" signifies priority or higher evaluation or desirability; choice or estimation above another.60Here, when Tio awarded the contract to Double A without public bidding, and when he and Cadiz caused the payment of P2,500,000.00 to Double A despite the incomplete documents, they gave Double A unwarranted benefits, advantage and preference.
Endnotes:
1 Both as Petitions for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
2 Penned by Associate Justice Sarah Jane T. Fernandez for the Special Third Division of the Sandiganbayan, with Presiding Justice Amparo M. Cabotaje-Tang and Associate Justice Samuel R. Martires (a former member of this Court) concurring; rollo, (G.R. No. 230132), pp. 15-44.
3 Penned by Associate Justice Sarah Jane T. Fernandez for the Special Third Division of the Sandiganbayan, with Presiding Justice Amparo M. Cabotaje-Tang and Associate Justice Samuel R. Martires (a former member of this Court) concurring; id. at 45-50.
4 Exhibit 3; id. at 203-204.
5 TSN, People v. Tio, SB-13-CRM-0575, July 28, 2015, Manuel A. Tio; id. at 459.
6 Exhibit F; id. at 191.
7 TSN, Manuel A. Tio, People v. Tio, SB-13-CRM-0575, September 21, 2015; id. at 509.
8 Exhibit E; id at 190.
9 Exhibit G; id.
10 BAC Resolution No. 01, series of 2009; id. at 188.
11 Exhibits 6-8; id. at 208-210.
12 Exhibit 10-A; id. at 215.
13 Exhibit A; id. at 186-187.
14Rollo (G.R. No. 230132), pp. 15-16.
15Id. at 43.
16Id. at 36-37.
17Id. at 29-36.
18Id. at 36-37.
19Id. at 40-43.
20Id. at 59-60.
21Id. at 60-62.
22Id. at 64.
23Rollo (G.R. No. 230252), pp. 10-23.
24Id. at 19.
25Id. at 14-17.
26People of the Philippines v. Raquel Austria Naciongayo, G.R. No. 243897, June 8, 2020.
27Id.
28Jose Tapales Villarosa v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 233155-63, June 23, 2020.
29 715 Phil. 733 (2013).
30Id. at 758, citing Sison v. People of the Philippines, 628 Phil. 573, 584 (2010).
31 Rollo (G.R. No. 230132), pp. 29-30.
32 Republic Act No. 9184, An Act Providing for the Modernization, Standardization and Regulation of the Procurement Activities of the Government and for Other Purposes, January, 10, 2003, §10.
33Rollo (G.R. No. 230132), p. 30.
34Id.
35 2016 Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. No. 9184.
36 Revised Guidelines for the Implementation of Infrastructure Projects by Administration, Government Procurement Policy Board (GPPB) Resolution No. 018-2006 dated December 6, 2006, § 2.1.
37 GPPB Resolution No. 20-2015.
38Rollo (G.R. No. 230132), p. 22; pp. 177-185.
39Id. at 24.
40Id. at 238-239.
41Id. at 495.
42Id. at 494.
43 Section 5. Definition of Terms. -
x x x x
(a) Approved Budget for the Contract (ABC) - refers to the budget for the contract duly approved by the Head of the Procuring Entity, as provided for in the General Appropriations Act and/or continuing appropriations,
x x x x;
Office of the Ombudsman v. Celiz, G.R. No. 236383, June 26, 2019.
44 Section 7. Procurement Planning and Budgeting Linkage[.] - All procurement should be within the approved budget of the Procuring Entity and should be meticulously and judiciously planned by the Procuring Entity concerned.
x x x x;
Office of the Ombudsman v. Celiz, supra.
45 Section 20. Pre-Procurement Conference - Prior to the issuance of the Invitation to Bid, the BAC is mandated to hold a pre-procurement conference on each and every procurement, except those contracts below a certain level or amount specified in the IRR, in which case, the holding of the same is optional.
The pre-procurement conference shall assess the readiness of the procurement in terms of confirming the certification of availability of funds, as well as reviewing all relevant documents and the draft Invitation to Bid, as well as consultants hired by the agency concerned and the representative of the [end-user].
Office of the Ombudsman v. Celiz, supra.
46Jacomille v. Sec. Abaya, et al., 759 Phil. 248, 272 (2015).
47Id.
48 TSN, Manuel A. Tio, People v. Tio, SB-13-CRM-0575, July 28, 2015; id. at 457-459.
49Id. at 459-460.
50Id. at 521.
51Id. at 36-37; 181.
52 TSN, Mercedes V. Reyes, People v. Tio, SB-13-CRM-0575, August 28, 2014; id. at 413.
53 TSN, Mercedes V. Reyes, People v. Tio, SB-13-CRM-0575, August 28, 2014; id. at 412.
54 702 Phil. 210 (2013).
55Id. at 255.
56 Section 474 (b)(4) and (5), R.A. No. 7160.
SECTION 474. Qualifications, Powers and Duties.
x x x x
(b) The accountant shall take charge of both the accounting and internal audit services of the local government unit concerned and shall:
x x x x
(4) Certify to the availability of budgetary allotment to which expenditures and obligations may be properly charged;
(5) Review supporting documents before preparation of vouchers to determine completeness of requirements[.]
57Liberty B. Tiongco v. People of the Philippines, G.R. Nos. 218709-10, November 14, 2018.
58Id.
59Rollo (G.R. No. 230132), Exhibits 6-8, p. 461.
60Rivera v. People, 749 Phil. 124, 143 (2014).