"The commission is not trying to be a hero; it is just doing its job."
The integrity of the electoral system, the honest use of government resources, and the non-politicization of the civil service were three of the principal concerns of the delegates to the 1934-1935 Constitutional Convention as they met to draw up a Constitution for an independent Republic of the Philippines.
To ensure the achievement of these desiderata, the delegates provided in the nascent Constitution for the establishment of three Constitutional bodies, viz., a Commission on Elections, a Civil Service Commission, and a General Auditing Office Being embodied in the Constitution, the three entities were to operate independently and their members were removable only by impeachment.
The Commission on Elections and Civil Service Commission have retained their original names, but the General Auditing Office has undergone two name changes: first it remained Auditory Commission and today it is known as the Commission on Audit (COA). The fact that the framers of both the 1973 Constitution and the 1987 Constitution constitute testimony to the wisdom and foresight of the delegates to the 1934-1935 Constitutional Convention, who counted my late father Jose among them.
Of the three constitutional commissions, comparatively the least controversy-ridden is the Civil Service Commission, though its domain is far larger than the domain of its companion commissions. The Commission on Elections—known for short as Comelec—becomes active every three years; today it is in the midst of operations for the May 9, 2022 national election. The delegates to the 1934-1935 Constitutional Convention vested the Comelec with constitutional status to insulate its work from political influence and pressure, but such insulation has been difficult to achieve completely, given the characters of Philippine politics and Filipino politicians.
With the exception of the congressional allowances episode of the 1960s—the Auditor General was sued by the then-newly-organized Philippine Constitution Association (Philconsa) for passing in audit unauthorized payments to members of Congress – COA has stayed high in the esteem of FIlipinos. The government auditors red-flagged unauthorized and illegal expenditures during the martial-law era even though such expenditures, for obvious reasons, went uncorrected and unpenalized.
COA has never been as busy or as controversial as it is today. For the first time in this country’s post-World War II history the government auditing service is under fire from the President of the Philippines. President Rodrigo Duterte’s ire was provoked by COA’s damning report flagging the non-use by the Department of Health (DOH) of P42 billion worth of national-budget allotment. Mr. Duterte has been flailing at COA, calling its report “unfair” and violative of administrative procedures for not having given DOH personnel an opportunity to present DOH’s side. The Chief Executive has declared an intention to conduct a DOH audit himself.
COA has gone to great lengths to explain that the accusations of unfairness and lack of administrative due process are without basis. There were extensive discussions with the concerned DOH personnel about the questioned expenditure items, COA has stated, and, as in all audits, there was what is known in the auditing profession as an exit conference. The DOH has not denied these things.
In issuing its audit reports, COA simply informs the FIlipino people of its findings regarding the operations of government institutions, in accordance with its constitutional mandate. It does not try to be a hero; it is just doing its job.
But in the face of Mr. Duterte’s frontal attack on COA, a hero is what the government auditing service has become. The entire Philippine business community, professional organizations, academe, and civil society have all come out openly in support of COA.
I join them in their common gesture of support. To COA chairman Michael Aguinaldo and his people, I heartily say ‘Bravo’.