The Commission on Audit (COA) has affirmed its 2020 decision which held liable former Manila mayor Jose L. Atienza Jr. and former city legal officer Melchor R. Monsod in the notice of disallowance (ND) for P34.7 million payment for a property bought by the city government in 2001.

It dismissed the motion for reconsideration filed by Atienza and Monsod who sought a reversal of its decision that affirmed the 2014 ruling issued by its National Capital Region Local Government Sector on the 2012 ND.

The 2012 ND found "irregularities" in the purchase of the property from the Basa-Guidote Enterprises, Inc., a firm owned by the family of the wife of the late Chief Justice Renato C. Corona.

In their motion, Atienza and Monsod pointed out that there was no showing that they acted in bad faith, since they had to rely to a reasonable extent on their subordinates and on those who prepared bids, purchase supplies, or enter into negotiations.

In denying their motion, COA said Atienza and Monsod cannot keep using their subordinates as "scapegoats" for their actions. Since the purchase of the lot is not a "run-of-the-mill transaction" or an everyday expense that is being presented to his office, Atienza should have taken extra care in approving the transaction by inquiring into the details to ensure compliance with the laws, it said.

It pointed out that it was Atienza who actively participated during the negotiations. It said he was also the one who entered into the contract for the purchase of the subject lot, which unfortunately was "attended with irregularities."

"While it may be true that as the head of office, Mayor Atienza Jr. is not required to examine every single detail of the transactions presented before him from its inception to its final approval, he should have taken an exception to this particular transaction since his direct participation was necessary from the onset of the transaction until its conclusion," COA said.

"It is evident that he was negligent in the discharge of his function when he approved the payment in the absence of a Sanggunian Resolution authorizing him to enter into a contract of sale, and ordinance appropriating the amount for the purchase of the lot, in violation of Article 35 of the IRR of R.A. No. 7160 (Local Government Code)," it added.

It ruled that the motion of Atienza and Monsod is denied for lack of merit, and the contested decision is "affirmed with finality."