The Commission on Audit filed a two-page notice of disallowance last October 29, 2009 against some of the government officials in the city of Manila. 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. The illegal transaction was said to have cost the city the amount of P5,058,000.00.
The notice of disallowance was filed soon after Mayor Alfredo Lim said in his affidavit that he did not have any knowledge, whatsoever, of the said transaction, and that he never authorized the purported contracted services to take place. 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. Ms. Rowena Senatin, Ms. Helen Natividad and Mr. Arturo Mijares were the said officials who attested Lim's words through their affidavits.
According to the officials, the names of the consultants that appeared in the payrolls that was submitted to them by some of the members of the accounting and property division of the city of Manila were not included in the list of consultants that were employed by the mayor. The three also confirmed that the consultants were 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.
Eleven officials from the accounting and property division of the local government of Manila were named as the persons liable for the said anomalous transaction. 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. Mayor Alfredo Lim and his staff confirmed that names of the perpetrators.
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 representative of the payment of salaries of the fictitious consultants, who were supposedly contracted by the city mayor. The notice given by the Commission of Audit was final, giving the involved officials six months to settle the issue. 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. Considering that all the local projects of Manila are needed to be approved by the mayor, what remains questionable in this instance is the fact that the release of payments was still done in spite of Lim claiming that he did not gave his authority for the said project. While there may have been people held liable for this transaction, the above question is a simple inquiry to further shed light on how the transaction was carried out. The public is waiting for this side of the story to be clarified.
Some officials from the city of Manila were involved in yet another government anomaly. The Commission on Audit filed a notice of disallowance against 11 Manila officials after deficiencies on the vouchers were found during the auditing process. The voucher contained the alleged consultancy fees of 21 fictitious consultants, who purportedly contracted to work for the office of the Mayor. Mayor Alfredo Lim claimed that he did not sign any contract concerning the appointment of the said consultants.
The notice of disallowance was filed soon after Mayor Alfredo Lim said in his affidavit that he did not have any knowledge, whatsoever, of the said transaction, and that he never authorized the purported contracted services to take place. 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. Ms. Rowena Senatin, Ms. Helen Natividad and Mr. Arturo Mijares were the said officials who attested Lim's words through their affidavits.
According to the officials, the names of the consultants that appeared in the payrolls that was submitted to them by some of the members of the accounting and property division of the city of Manila were not included in the list of consultants that were employed by the mayor. The three also confirmed that the consultants were 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.
Eleven officials from the accounting and property division of the local government of Manila were named as the persons liable for the said anomalous transaction. 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. Mayor Alfredo Lim and his staff confirmed that names of the perpetrators.
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 representative of the payment of salaries of the fictitious consultants, who were supposedly contracted by the city mayor. The notice given by the Commission of Audit was final, giving the involved officials six months to settle the issue. 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. Considering that all the local projects of Manila are needed to be approved by the mayor, what remains questionable in this instance is the fact that the release of payments was still done in spite of Lim claiming that he did not gave his authority for the said project. While there may have been people held liable for this transaction, the above question is a simple inquiry to further shed light on how the transaction was carried out. The public is waiting for this side of the story to be clarified.
Some officials from the city of Manila were involved in yet another government anomaly. The Commission on Audit filed a notice of disallowance against 11 Manila officials after deficiencies on the vouchers were found during the auditing process. The voucher contained the alleged consultancy fees of 21 fictitious consultants, who purportedly contracted to work for the office of the Mayor. Mayor Alfredo Lim claimed that he did not sign any contract concerning the appointment of the said consultants.
No comments:
Post a Comment