Nacion Vs Commission On Audit PDF
Nacion Vs Commission On Audit PDF
Nacion Vs Commission On Audit PDF
Information | Reference
Case Title:
ATTY. JANET D. NACION, petitioner,
vs. COMMISSION ON AUDIT, MA.
GRACIA PULIDO-TAN, JUANITO
ESPINO and HEIDI MENDOZA, G.R. No. 204757. March 17, 2015.*
respondents.
Citation: 753 SCRA 297 ATTY. JANET D. NACION, petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON
More... AUDIT, MA. GRACIA PULIDO-TAN, JUANITO ESPINO and
HEIDI MENDOZA, respondents.
Search Result Grave Abuse of Discretion; The Supreme Court (SC) emphasized in
Dycoco v. Court of Appeals, 702 SCRA 566 (2013), that „[a]n act of a court
or tribunal can only be considered as with grave abuse of discretion when
such act is done in a Âcapricious or whimsical exercise of judgment as is
equivalent to lack of jurisdiction.ʉ·The concept is well-entrenched: grave
abuse of discretion exists when there is an evasion of a positive duty or a
virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law or to act in contemplation
of law as when the judgment rendered is not based on law and evidence
but on caprice, whim, and despotism. Not every error in the proceedings,
or every erroneous conclusion of law or fact, constitutes grave abuse of
discretion. The abuse of discretion to be qualified as „grave‰ must be so
patent or gross as to constitute an evasion of a positive duty or a virtual
refusal to perform the duty or to act at all in contemplation of
_______________
* EN BANC.
298
299
300
RESOLUTION
REYES, J.:
The Administrative Case Evaluation Report dated June 21, 2011 of the
Fraud Audit and Investigation Office (FAIO), Legal Services Sector (LSS)
as well as the Investigation Report submitted by the Team from the FAIO
disclosed the following reprehensible actions:
1. Receiving benefits and/or bonuses from MWSS in the total amount of
P73,542.00 from 1999-2003[;]
2. Availing of the MWSS Housing Project;
_______________
301
_______________
6 Id.
7 Id., at p. 85.
8 Id., at pp. 111-114.
9 Id., at p. 63.
302
302 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Nacion vs. Commission on Audit
an honest belief that she could avail of the benefit given the
absence of any prohibition thereon upon COA personnel. COA
Resolution No. 2004-005, which prohibited COA employees from
availing of all forms of loan, monetary benefits or any form of credit
assistance from agencies under their audit jurisdiction, was issued
only on July 27, 2004.10
Nacion admitted that she also availed of the MWSS Multi-
Purpose Loan Program · Car Loan, upon an honest belief that she
was not prohibited from doing so. She emphasized that her car
purchase was not subsidized. She was obligated to pay in full the
principal amount of the loan, plus interest and incidental expenses
like registration fees and insurance premiums.11
Nacion, however, denied having received bonuses and benefits
from MWSS. She argued that the MWSS claims control index and
journal vouchers upon which the charge was based were not
conclusive proof of her receipt of the benefits, absent payrolls
showing her signature. In any case, as a sign of good faith, Nacion
offered to, first, restitute the full amount of P73,542.00 to save
government time and expenses in hearing the case and put to rest
the issues that arose from it, and second, give up her right over the
MWSS lot provided she would get back her investment on the
property.12
_______________
303
Director Nacion did not request for a formal investigation, hence, has
saved this Commission from the inconvenience and cost of such
proceeding. She also admitted availing both the Housing Project and
MPLP Car Loan. Her long years in service [are] also worth considering as
she has spent her productive years in the public service. x x x.16
In addition to the suspension, Nacion was ordered to refund the
amount of P73,542.0017 and return the lot which she acquired
under the MWSS housing program. The dispositive portion of the
COA decision then reads:
_______________
304
The core issue for the CourtÊs resolution is: whether or not the
COA committed grave abuse of discretion in finding Nacion guilty of
grave misconduct and violation of reasonable office rules and
regulations.
To support her petition against the COA, Nacion invokes due
process as she argues that the records during her tenure with the
MWSS should not have been included by the audit team in its
investigations, as no office order covering it was issued by the COA
Chairman. Furthermore, the documentary evidence considered by
the Fraud Audit and Investigation
_______________
18 Id., at p. 42.
19 Id., at pp. 44-48.
305
_______________
20 Espinas v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 198271, April 1, 2014, 720 SCRA
302.
21 G.R. No. 147257, July 31, 2013, 702 SCRA 566.
22 Id., at p. 580, citing Yu v. Reyes-Carpio, G.R. No. 189207, June 15, 2011, 652
SCRA 341, 348.
306
Sec. 2. How commenced.·
(1) Administrative proceedings may be commenced against a
subordinate official or employee of the Commission by the Chairman
motu proprio, or upon sworn, written complaint of any other person. (Sec.
38[a], PD 807)
x x x x (Emphasis ours)
_______________
23 Lacson v. Executive Secretary, G.R. Nos. 165399 and 165475, May 30, 2011,
649 SCRA 142, 155.
24 Rules of Procedure in the Investigation of Administrative Cases against
Personnel of the Commission on Audit. Dated April 27, 1976.
307
The power of the COA to discipline its officials then could not be
limited by the procedure being insisted upon by Nacion. Neither is
the authority of the Chairperson to commence the action through
the issuance of the formal charge restricted by the requirement of a
prior written complaint. As may be gleaned from the cited
provision, a written complaint under oath is demanded only when
the administrative case is commenced by a person other than the
COA Chairperson.
Contrary to NacionÊs claim, the COA also did not act beyond its
jurisdiction when her case was considered by the FAIO
investigating team, notwithstanding the fact that the office order
which commanded an inquiry upon MWSS personnel merely
referred to alleged unauthorized receipt of bonuses and benefits
from the agency by Atty. Norberto Cabibihan (Atty. Cabibihan) and
his staff. Since NacionÊs stint in MWSS was before Atty.
CabibihanÊs, she argued that the team should not have looked into
the records and circumstances during her term. In including
benefits received during her term, Nacion claimed that the
investigating team acted beyond its jurisdiction and deprived her of
the right to due process.
The contention fails to persuade; a separate office order was not
necessary for the audit teamÊs investigation of NacionÊs case. It
should be emphasized that prior to the issuance of the formal
charge, the investigations conducted by the team were merely fact-
finding. The crucial point was the COAÊs observance of the demands
of due process prior to its finding or decision that Nacion was
administratively liable. The formation of a separate fact-finding
team that should look specifically into NacionÊs acts was not
necessary to satisfy the requirement. The formal charge was as yet
to be issued by the COA Chairperson, and NacionÊs formal
investigation commenced only after she had filed her answer to the
charge. It was undisputed that Nacion, despite a chance, did not
request for such formal investigation, a circumstance which the
COA later considered as mitigating. In any case, she was still ac-
308
Substantial Evidence
in Administrative Case
_______________
309
_______________
27 Rollo, p. 39.
310
310 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Nacion vs. Commission on Audit
_______________
28 See Villareña v. Commission on Audit, 455 Phil. 908; 408 SCRA 455 (2003).
311
_______________
29 1st P200,000.00 – 0%; Over P200,000.00 – 3%; Over P500,000.00 – 6%; Rollo,
p. 38.
30 Supra note 28.
312
_______________
313
Petition dismissed.
_______________
314