THE Commission on Audit (COA) has upheld the notice of disallowance it issued in 2012 against the P34.7 million payment of the city government of Manila for the 1,020.7-square meter Basa-Guidote property in 2001.
COA Commissioners Roland Café Pondoc and Mario G. Lipana denied the motion for reconsideration filed by former Manila mayor Jose “Lito” Atienza and former City Legal Officer Melchor Monsod seeking reversal of the commission’s January 31, 2020 ruling which declared that “the transaction is attended with irregularities.”
COA chairperson Gamaliel A. Cordoba inhibited from the case and took no part in resolving the appeal of former city officials.
The city government purchased the property in 2001 from the Basa-Guidote Enterprises Inc. (BGEI) to be used for the Legarda Intermediate Station for the MRT Line 2 Project.
A Land Bank of the Philippines check for P34,703,800 was paid to Cristina R. Corona, wife of the late Chief Justice Renato Corona, who represented BGEI.
However, the transaction was later disallowed in audit on several grounds.
Auditors said the city overpaid the seller at P34,000 per square meter when the adjusted market value of the lot was only P13,122 per sqm, while the zonal value of the property per assessment by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) was only P21,000 per sq. m. in 2001.
Likewise, auditors questioned the submission by the BGEI representative of a Secretary’s Certificate dated June 19, 1987 which was already 14 years old on the date of the execution of the Deed of Absolute Sale. Auditors said the city should have insisted on a recent and duly authorized special power of attorney.
Furthermore, the payment for the purchase was charged against the continuing appropriations for the Engineering Services/DEPW for the construction of the new Sampaloc market even if there was no ordinance passed realigning the budget for expropriation to pay the lot acquired through negotiated purchase.
There was also City Council resolution authorizing then Mayor Atienza to enter into a contract of sale, as required under RA 7160 or the Local Government Code.
Atienza and Monsod assailed the 2020 ruling on the ground that the Notice of Suspension which ripened into a disallowance was a spurious document, saying it only surfaced during the impeachment trial of the former Chief Justice at the Senate.
They likewise argued that the evidence relied upon by the COA was insufficient to justify the decision, asserting that the Implementing Rules and Regulations of RA 7160 are “procedures and guidelines only” intended to facilitate compliance and achieve the objective of the law.
Both city officials contended the ordinance authorizing the former mayor to expropriate land to be used for the relocation site of stallholders constituted sufficient compliance with RA 7160.
