Binay’s office: SB explained rejection of COA findings
In her column published Sept. 29, 2012, Solita Monsod questioned the basis of the Sandiganbayan decision dismissing in 2011 the graft case against former Makati Mayor Elenita S. Binay, wife of Vice President Jejomar C. Binay.
It seems that Monsod is a true believer in the infallibility of Commission on Audit (COA) Commissioner Heidi Mendoza. For Monsod, the antigraft court based its decision on considerations other than facts and merit. Allow us to quote the decision of the Sandiganbayan’s Second Division for the enlightenment of Monsod.
The Sandiganbayan expressed its “disbelief that the prosecution came to Court with such shoddy evidence, leaving us no alternative but to spare the accused from the unnecessary burden, expense and anxiety of having to defend themselves in a public trial.”
The case was based on the findings of a COA team headed by Mendoza alleging overprice in the purchase of furniture for the City Hall. The court found that the allegations of excess purchase was “reached on the basis of the flawed procedure” of the audit team.
According to the Sandiganbayan, the audit procedure adopted by Mendoza violated the rules of the COA, which requires a comparison of similar items to prove allegations of overprice.
Mendoza and her team admitted to the court that they relied on “a mere comparison of the height and size of the items … without considering the materials.” “They did not even consider the source” of the items. Mendoza herself “confessed that the details of the items compared in their audit are not the same,” the court said.
Specifically, the COA team relied on a “simple document comparison only” “without referring to a confirmatory physical count of the partitions actually used in the City Hall.” Therefore, the audit team irresponsibly hurled accusations without first confirming if the purchases were indeed excessive.
Mendoza employed the same audit procedure in the case now being heard in the Sandiganbayan. The counsels for Mrs. Binay are eagerly awaiting the chance to cross-examine Mendoza and they are confident that they can expose, on cross, the weakness of the theories and conclusions she presented to the Court in its hearing last week.
—JOSELITO SALGADO,
head, Media Affairs Division,
Office of the Vice President,
