The Supreme Court (SC) has affirmed the notices of disallowance (NDs) issued by the Commission on Audit (COA) on the P204.07 million that was given to officials and employees of the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) as efficiency and birthday gifts, among other benefits, in 2007 and 2008.
(MANILA BULLETIN)
In a unanimous decision written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SC said PhilHealth officials who approved and certified the grant of the monetary benefits are liable to return P16.2 million.
It also ordered the recipients to refund the amount they received, “since it was erroneously given to and received by them.”
The other COA-issued NDs which were affirmed by the SC included the birthday gift (P5.97 million), special event (P8.7 million), nominal gift (P29.5 million), education assistance (P49.28 million), project completion benefit (P4.98 million), payment of liability insurance premium for PhilHealth board of directors and officers (P638,000), corporate transition and achievement premium (P81.05 million), and medical mission critical allowance (P7.91 million).
While called “efficiency gifts’, the SC said there was no indication that the disallowed amount was “genuinely” intended as compensation for services rendered by the recipients.
It was found that the disallowed amounts of PhilHealth funds were disbursed without the approval from the Office of the President (OP) as required under Memorandum Order No. 20 dated June 2001 and Administrative Order No. 103 dated August 31, 2004.
PhilHealth’s resident auditor issued the NDs because the payment of liability insurance premium for Philhealth directors and officers violated Section 73 of Republic Act 9184 (Government Procurement Reform Act) and Government Procurement Policy Board Resolution No. 21-05.
On July 12, 2012, the COA-Corporate Government Sector denied the appeals filed by PhilHealth and affirmed all the NDs.
On Dec. 27, 2016, COA’s main office dismissed the petition for review filed by PhilHealth for lack of merit and for late filing.
Agreeing with COA’s main office also declared that the officials of PhilHealth who authorized, approved or certified the grants could not be deemed in good faith since the law requires the prior approval of the OP.
Agreeing with COA, the SC said that PhilHealth should have observed the policies and guidelines issued by the OP in granting any additional personnel benefits.
“Considering that the ruling of the Court on the need for approval from the OP has long been existing, the Court cannot allow PhilHealth to feign ignorance to the pronouncement,” the SC said.
“Given the foregoing, the Court is unconvinced that the officers of PhilHealth who approved the benefits in question acted in good faith when they approved and granted these benefits,” it added.
PhilHealth is under investigation by the Department of Justice (DOJ) in connection with alleged multi-billion corruption in the agency.
The DOJ’s Task Force PhilHealth had recommended the filing of criminal and administrative charges against seven officials of the agency for violation of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
It had also endorsed to the Office of the Ombudsman the recommendation of the Presidential Anti-Corruption Commission (PACC) to file criminal and administrative charges against 25 other incumbent and former officials of PhilHealth for their alleged involvement in fraudulent membership enrolment and fraudulent benefit claims.