THE Commission on Audit has affirmed notices of disallowance issued against P12.41 million paid as wages for casual employees of the Ozamis City government in 2010 over dubious signatures and support documents submitted for the payroll.
In a five-page decision, the COA Commission Proper upheld the 2016 ruling of COA Regional Office No. 10 that upheld the findings of irregularities in a special audit conducted from January 21 to March 3, 2011 at the request of then Misamis Occidental (2nd District) Rep. Loreto Leo Ocampos.
Auditors listed numerous payroll irregularities, including different signatures on the daily time records and on the payroll, claims of 31-day work on months with only 30 days, work-day slips that fall on Saturdays and Sundays, residence certificates with control numbers issued to other areas outside of the city, and lack of work programs, overtime authority, or accomplishment reports.
Held liable in the disallowance were then mayor Reynaldo Parojinog Sr.; former mayor Nova Princess Parojinog-Echavez; disbursing officers Alma Dumpor and Tita Yapac; city accountant Cynthia Ferraren and OIC city accountant Thelma Coronel; economic enterprise department head Jonathan Rubio; Public Employment Service Office manager Judith Halasan; and former vice mayor Carlos Bernad.
Mayor Reynaldo Parojinog was killed during a police raid at his home on July 30, 2017 as part of the Duterte administration’s war on drugs. His daughter, then vice mayor Nova Princess Parojinog-Echavez was arrested and subsequently detained.
Initially, the suspended wage payments amounted to P32.59 million but city officials were able to settle for the sum of P20.18 million, leaving only P12.41 million which matured into disallowance.
In affirming the disallowance, the COA noted that the documents submitted by the city officials were insufficient to justify the entire suspended disbursements.
“There were no sufficient evidence submitted by the petitioners to disprove the double claim/payments made to the same employees. Similarly, the submitted DTRs were tainted with irregularity due to discrepancies in the signatures of the employees which the petitioners likewise failed to dispute,” the commission said.
No weight was given to the sworn statements of the supposed casual employees for failure to comply with the Rules on Notarial Practices, specifically that the affiant was personally known to the notary public or that his identity was duly established through competent evidence.
