Sunday, May 2, 2010

Fictitious Contracted Services In The City Of Manila Questioned By The Commission On Audit

A two-page notice of disallowance against some of the government officials in the city Manila was released by the Commission on Audit last October 29, 2009. The Commission on Audit filed the said notice when they found out that there were deficiencies on the voucher presented by the officials, which concerned the payments for the alleged contracted services of 21 consultants. However, based from the results of the audit prepared by Domingo C. Bocalan Jr., State Auditor IV, the submitted vouchers or payrolls for the period covering July1, 2007 to June 30, 2009 for alleged contracted services were void and that the supposed 21 consultants were fictitious employees. Accordingly, the anomalous transaction cost Manila the amount of P5,058,000.00.

The said notice of disallowance was released after Mayor Alfredo Lim stated in his affidavit, the he never authorized nor appointed Nelson Del Mundo and the rest of the supposed 21 consultants to work in his office. The Mayor also added that he never signed any contract related to the purported services nor did he granted the payment for the supposed 21 consultants. Lim's claims in his affidavit were backed up by three of his trusted staff. The three office staff who supported the mayor's statement were Rowena Senatin, Helen Natividad and Arturo Mijares.

The three office staff said in their affidavit that the consultants, whose names appeared in the voucher submitted to them, were never employed by the mayor. Senatin, Natividad and Mijares confirmed that the name Nelson Del Mundo as well as the other alleged consultants was fictitious. This particular government anomaly is just one of the corrupt practices plaguing Manila's local government. Nonetheless, like any other forms of illegal activities, the transaction was done in order to benefit the people involved.

The notice given by the Commission on Audit named 11 officials from the accounting and property division of Manila. The named officials were Pacifico Lagramada, Yolanda Ignacio, Marleen Young, Gloria Quilantang, Vicky Valientes, Erlinda Marteja, Philip Cabalun II, Cherry Chan, Alicia Moscaya, Fritz Noel Borres, and Rodelio Leyson. The said individuals were responsible for facilitating the payment of the fictitious 21 consultants worth P5,058,000.00 without rendering actual services. Their names were confirmed by the affidavit presented by Mayor Alfredo Lim and three of his staff.

In the notice submitted by Bocolan, he recommended that the involved personnel from the accounting and property division of the city of Manila to refund the P5,058,000.00. The said amount was the payment for the consultants of the alleged contracted services. The Commission on Audit gave the involved personnel six months in order to appeal the notice addressed to them. Accordingly, if the said individuals were not able to comply, the commission would take the necessary steps in order to enforce the notice.

Although the words of Mayor Alfredo Lim may have served as the justification for the named individuals to be held liable by the Commission on Audit, it appears that there is something wrong with this transaction. It is known that every local project are needed to be approved by the mayor before it is facilitated; in this instance though, what remains questionable is the fact that the project was not hindered although Mayor Lim said that he did not approved it. While the involved personnel were held liable for this transaction, the fact remains that there is a blind side to this story that remains to be addressed. This side of the story is something that needs to be clarified to the public.

The Commission on Audit filed a notice of disallowance against some of the officials from the local government of the city of Manila. The notice was given as a response to the government anomaly that concerns the payment of P5,058,000.00 among the fictitious 21 consultants who were allegedly contracted to work for the office of Mayor Alfredo Lim. The Commission on Audit recommended the officials to refund the full amount as a means to settle the issue.

-Julius Arante

No comments:

Post a Comment