The entire
Filipino nation is enraged with how their billions of tax money are stolen through the Priority Development Fund (PDF), or simply the “pork
barrel fund”.
Perhaps only
a few do know that government funds are also pilfered through other
disbursements and loose accountability measures. Or people do know, only that its enormity is
not put to light because it is cloaked as classified information.
Among the
most abused funds are the “Confidential and Intelligence Fund” and the twenty
percent (20%) mandatory “Development Funds” of local government units (LGUs).
Intelligence
funds are appropriated pursuant to Section 16, or the general welfare clause,
of The Local Government Code, “in furtherance of the duties of local chief
executives to maintain peace and order for the people’s comfort, convenience, and welfare, or for intelligence activities when the use of other funds is not
applicable or would either expose or hinder the mission of the intelligence
unit”.
It is termed
“the favorite source of corruption in Local Government Units” because unlike
other fund items in a budget,
Intelligence Funds are audited in a different manner that its accounting
or liquidation is directed to the Chairman of the Commission on Audit (COA),
“FOR HIS EYES ONLY”, in a sealed envelope delivered through registered mail,
courier, or hand-carried by an authorized liaison officer/s.
The
I.F. report contains the liquidation
vouchers, certified machine copies of the disbursement vouchers of the cash
advance being liquidated, and a certification of the agency concerned that :
"We hereby certify that the amount
of _____ (Php______) was incurred by the undersigned with PROJECT ________ (File Code No.)
We further certify that the
aforementioned Project is a highly confidential operation/ mission, the details
of which cannot be divulged without posing a threat to national security. We certify however that the details and
supporting documents are in our custody and kept in our confidential file and
may be audited if the circumstances so demand.”
So simple
under the guise of confidentiality. Now
comes the money.
Cash advances from
the I.F. Fund
If this is strictly so, will
the COA Chair have the luxury of time to scrutinize each and every liquidation
report from at least 82 provinces, 135 cities, and 1,493 municipalities?
Or will it be practical to
verify each expense item in the vouchers? Why bother then even to open the
sealed report, which may just probably contain nothing but bogus activities and
signatures as no informant will give out a receipt or sign a Reimbursement
Expense Receipt (RER) for purposes of liquidation?
To
be fair, some COA Auditors had also the tenacity to criticize but given their
limited prerogatives on the Confidential and Intelligence Expenses (CIE), reviews
are restricted to the amount appropriated and its status of liquidation but
not to its actual use or details of liquidation.
 |
| Cash Advances |
COA Auditors have reported that “the Provincial Government of Negros Oriental has released P12.7 million in confidential and intelligence expenses (CIE) in 2011, more than P8.6 million of the amount allowed by law (Michael Punogbayan, COA Questions Excessive Negros Intel Funds, Philippine Star, updated March 12, 2013).”
COA Auditors
also “questioned a P25- million cash advance, made in five checks of P5 million
each, by the Cebu provincial government charged to its intelligence funds in
April 2010 or a month before the May local and national elections. It noted
procedural lapses since the fund was disbursed by the provincial treasurer
instead of a high-ranking PNP officer.
 |
| More Cash Advances |
‘The COA also noted that the cash advances were made without receipts, liquidation vouchers, and a report to the main COA office (Candeze R. Mongoya, 25-M ‘intelligence funds’ released a month before polls, Cebu Daily News, October 12, 2011).”
One
can only speculate on whatever happened to these findings, or how other LGUs
can get away with it. If confidential
information can be bought, then so with silence and tolerant eyes
But “The Sandiganbayan
recently convicted former Dapitan City municipal mayor Joseph Cedrick Ruiz for
graft and malversation charges for pocketing close to P1 million in
confidential intelligence fund (CIF) from 1998 to 2001. Aside from
imprisonment, the former mayor who was eventually appointed as judge of the
Regional Trial Court in Makati was also slapped with perpetual special
disqualification from holding any public office, fined P950,000 equivalent to
the amount pocketed, and ordered to indemnify the city of Dapitan the sum of
P950,000, plus interest.
 |
| More Cash Advance |
‘Records showed
that for the period from June 30, 1998, to June 30, 2001, Ruiz allowed Police
Inspector Pepe E. Nortal to request, for and in his behalf, the withdrawal as
cash advance the amount of P1 million from the CIF appropriated under the
Office of the City Mayor for the fiscal year 2001 “to address the peace and order
situation of Dapitan City Ex-Dapitan
mayor gets 6-year imprisonment for pocketing intelligence funds. In convicting Ruiz, the Sandiganbayan stated that the
timing of the P1-million cash advance was suspect as it was done on May 16,
2001, or five days after the May 11, 2001, elections, where he lost his bid for
reelection.
 |
| Still more advances |
Accused Ruiz’s failure to satisfactorily explain where the money went is
sufficient to conclude that he converted the same for his personal use,” the
ruling said (Cynthia D. Balana,
Ex-Dapitan mayor gets 6-year imprisonment for pocketing intelligence funds,
Philippine Daily Inquirer, May 23, 2013.)”
These convictions or findings are but a drop in the bucket of money
pilfered, in spite of the rules governing the use of intelligence funds outlined
in Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) Memorandum Circular No.
99-65 dated April 23, 1999.
Unquestionably, Confidential and Intelligence Expenses should exclude
expenses for political purposes, irrespective of the Chief Local Executives’
wide latitude of discretion as to their use.
There are rules to be followed otherwise it would amount to criminal
malversation or technical malversation.
Among others, its use is exclusive to “(1) the purchase of
information; (2) payment of rewards; (3) rental and other incidental expenses
relative to the maintenance of safe houses; and (4) purchase of supplies and
ammunitions, provision of medical and food aid, as well as payment of incentives
or traveling expenses relative to the conduct of intelligence or confidential
operations (paragraph 3, II, DILG
Memorandum Circular No. 99-65 dated April 23, 1999,” which Provincial
Governors, City Mayors, and Municipal Mayors are authorized to use public funds
for said purposes.
The ammunition and other supplies enumerated under item (4) is actually duplicity as these can be purchased from the regular funds of the LGU, or the medical and food aid from the calamity fund in case of a state of calamity.
Unless perhaps the LGU is building an armory, then it may purchase ammunitions both from the regular fund and from the intelligence fund.
The minimum allowable ceiling to use funds for intelligence or confidential purposes shall not exceed thirty percent (30%) of the total annual amount allocated for peace and order efforts or, three percent (3%) of the total annual appropriations, whichever is lower.
Therefore, for a middle-class LGU with an assumed annual budget of Php
40,000,000.00, the 3% Intelligence Fund allocation could go as high as 1.2
million pesos, which to an Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) dependent third-class municipality is substantial to finance more priority expenses rather than
just being pocketed.
Section 16 under the General Welfare Clause is one of the flaws of the
Local Government Code. It is redundant and overlaps with the non-devolved specialized
functions of other government agencies.
What needs an LGU of intelligence operations when it already has at
its disposal the local Philippine National Police with its own Intelligence
Division? Foremost, there is the
National Intelligence Coordinating Agency (NICA), the primary intelligence
gathering and analysis arm of the Philippine government, in charge of carrying
out overt, covert, and clandestine intelligence programs.
There is also the National Bureau of Investigation, the Intelligence
Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (ISAFP), the Criminal
Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG) of the PNP, and the Philippine Drug
Enforcement Agency (PDEA) for drug-related cases, all of which agencies are
more capable in intelligence operations.
The intelligence reports gathered by these specialized bodies are
cascaded to LGUs through the Peace and Order Council, among others
It seems that the avarice and slothfulness of many LGUs has not
ended.
“Officers of the Philippine Councilors League have
expressed support for the bills seeking to increase the internal revenue
allotment (IRA) shares of local government units.
‘Alan D. Zulueta, PCL chairman
and Tagum City (Davao del Norte) councilor, said the national government should
get only 40% share of Internal Revenue and LGUs should be the one to get 60%
because of the functions devolved to it it. He said that local governments
should be given more funds to address poverty and local peace and order
problems (Adrian P. Nemes III, Posted on
Business World Online, August 12, 2013.)”
The increased budget allocation
for local peace and order would mean a higher Intelligence Fund, and LGUs will
tend to rely on IRA rather than tap their own revenue sources.
From another perspective, at the onset of the Local Government Code
cities mushroomed as municipalities frenzied for cityhood. This was what occurred in the case of the “16
Cities” that have taken the Congressional backdoor and became cities by the
benefit of the Supreme Court’s flip-flopping and contempt of the Rules of Court.
A mad scramble for cityhood for
the sole purpose of augmenting their share of the IRA. Internal Revenue Allotment that has not been
properly channeled for development, but spent more for Personal Services (PS)
and consequently for Confidential and Intelligence Expenses.
Contrary opinions may assert that there is simply no proof to convince a
reasonable mind as to the fund’s misuse.
In a small remote town down south, Intelligence Fund is divided per
quarter of the year among the Local Chief Executive, Vice Mayor, and the
incumbent Sangguniang Bayan Members as if it is their own personal fund or
additional compensation.
Disbursements are made through a “vale system” from the Municipal
Treasurer, the same way that daily wage laborers make cash advances by the use
of a piece of paper written on it the amount as charged to “I.F.” for a certain
quarter, and signed by the municipal official concerned.
Unashamed thievery of public funds, undignified for men wanting to be
addressed as “Honorables”.
Money chargeable to their I.F. share was collected from the Municipal
Treasurer as if withdrawing from their personal piggy bank.
An employee who was nauseated by this
feasting on public funds has initiated charges before the Office of the
Ombudsman. She was however demeaned by
the respondents through counsel that the “complainant, a mere Messenger I assigned at the
Accounting Office, would question the manner by which the Intelligence Fund of
the Municipal Mayor will be spent”. It
was very disturbing and shocks moral sensibilities. It is but another way of saying that by
virtue of their public position and rank the respondents are above the law and
not accountable to the people.
The “mere
messenger”, as the demeaning reference made to the complainant by the
distinguished and honorable respondents, is also a citizen and a taxpayer who
takes an active interest in the management of the affairs and funds of the
government, and to whom the respondents in their official capacities are
accountable to.
The argument
mirrors an abusive behavior and personality of the respondents and counsel that
well exemplifies neo-colonial and neo-feudal arrogance that erodes public trust
in the government and fans the flame of insurgency.
Unfortunately, the Office of the
Ombudsman in gist has favored the respondents and subscribed to their
arguments that “there should first be a finding of the COA before charges
could proceed.”
Primarily, how can there be COA
findings when resident auditors are precluded by statutes to scrutinize
disbursements of the Intelligence Fund?
But sans COA findings the Office
of the Ombudsman has failed to see at least the irregularity in the disbursement
of funds through a “vale system”, in violation of Section 338 of the Local
Government Code which governs fiscal disbursements in local government units.
“CHAPTER
4, - Expenditures, Disbursements, Accounting, and Accountability
SECTION 339. Cash Advances.
– No cash advance shall be granted to any local official or employee, elective
or appointive, unless made in accordance with the rules and regulations as the
Commission on Audit may prescribe. (Section 338 & Section 339, Chapter IV,
Book II, Republic Act 7160)”
Why did the Mayor allowed it? It
was a blackmail in disguise. The Legislative
approved the budget and the Local Chief Executive was held hostage.
But nonetheless, “Facinus quos inquinal
aequal” – villany and guilt make all those whom it contaminates equal in
character.
Together with the pork barrel the
intelligence expenses must be scrapped as there is already the Peace and Order
Initiatives in existence which are audited in the standard manner that requires
a more detailed and rigorous justifications.
The Commission on Audit must also
review and identify the loopholes in the present system of Confidential and
Intelligence Expenses audit, and rework for a more stringent accountability
measures.
Another favorite source of “petty
corruption” is the use of the mandatory 20% development fund of LGUs. From the development fund expenses for
junkets under the pretext of “lakbay-aral (educational tours)” or “benchmarking” may be sourced.
What is in Hongkong or Beijing
that may be learned and adopted as a development tool or strategy in a backward
agricultural municipality? Neither is it
necessary for a purely internal meeting of an LGU to be held in Boracay at the
sole expense of the government. What a
waste of money. National government
agencies can’t simply do that, and if ever, it’s because the convention is
inter-agency, sponsored, and/or with participants from all over the country.
It was a respite though that in
the incumbency of the late Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG)
Secretary Jesse M. Robredo and Department of Budget and Management (DBM)
Secretary Florencio B. Abad a Joint Memorandum Circular No. 2011-1 dated April
13, 2011 was issued amending the guidelines on the appropriation and utilization
of the 20% of the annual internal revenue allotment for development projects,
“to enhance transparency and accountability of local government units in
undertaking development projects”.
The use of the 20% development
fund was confined to Social Development, Economic Development, and
Environmental Management and it specifically excluded
1. Administrative expenses such as cash gift,
bonuses, food allowance, medical assistance, uniforms, supplies, meetings,
communication, water and light, petroleum products and the like;
2.
Salaries, wages or overtime pay;
3.
Travelling expenses, whether
domestic and foreign;
4.
Registration or participation
fees in training, seminars, conferences or conventions;
5.
Construction, repair or
refinishing of administrative offices;
6.
Purchase of administrative
office’ furniture, fixtures, equipment or appliances; and
7.
Purchase, maintenance or repair
of motor vehicles or motor cycles.
Has junkets stopped, or it simply assumed new disguises?
No comments:
Post a Comment