G.R. No. 204757 March 17, 2015
ATTY. JANET D. NACION, Petitioner, vs. COMMISSION ON AUDIT, MA. GRACIA PULIDO-TAN, JUANITO ESPINO and HEIDI MENDOZA, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Atty. Janet D. Nacion was a State Auditor V assigned to the Metropolitan Waterworks Sewerage System (MWSS) from October 16, 2001 to September 15, 2003. On June 27, 2011, while holding the position of Director IV at the COA National Government Sector, she was formally charged by COA Chairperson Ma. Gracia M. Pulido Tan for acts committed during her MWSS assignment. The charges were Grave Misconduct and Violation of Reasonable Office Rules and Regulations based on: 1) Receiving benefits/bonuses from MWSS totaling P73,542.00 from 1999-2003; 2) Availing of the MWSS Housing Project (awarded a 300-sq.m. lot); and 3) Availing of the MWSS Multi-Purpose Loan Program Car Loan. The investigation was prompted by a complaint from the MWSS Administrator about unrecorded checks and irregular disbursements for COA personnel benefits.
In her answer, Nacion admitted availing of the housing project and car loan, invoking an honest belief that it was allowed as COA Resolution No. 2004-005 (which explicitly prohibited such availments) was issued only in 2004. She denied receiving the cash bonuses, arguing the evidence (journal vouchers, claims control index) was inconclusive without her signature on payrolls. As a sign of good faith, she offered to refund the P73,542.00 and return the lot provided her investment was returned.
The COA, in its Decision dated June 14, 2012, found her guilty. It cited Section 18 of R.A. No. 6758 (Compensation and Position Classification Act of 1989) which prohibits COA personnel from receiving emoluments from any government entity except those paid directly by COA, and noted that prohibitions existed even prior to COA Resolution No. 2004-005 under Executive Order No. 292 and the Code of Ethics for Government Auditors. Considering mitigating circumstances (she did not request a formal investigation, admitted some charges, and had long years of service), she was meted a penalty of one-year suspension without pay (instead of dismissal), ordered to refund P73,542.00, and return the MWSS lot. Her motion for reconsideration was denied on November 5, 2012.

ISSUE

Whether or not the Commission on Audit committed grave abuse of discretion in finding petitioner Atty. Janet D. Nacion guilty of grave misconduct and violation of reasonable office rules and regulations.

RULING

The Supreme Court DISMISSED the petition for lack of merit, finding no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the COA.
The Court held that the COA did not violate Nacion’s right to due process. The essence of due process in administrative proceedings is the opportunity to be heard, which she was given when she submitted her sworn answer and motion for reconsideration. A separate fact-finding team or office order specifically for her case was not necessary. The COA Chairperson had the authority under COA rules to initiate proceedings motu proprio without a sworn written complaint from another person.
The Court found substantial evidence to support the charges. For the cash bonuses (Extra Christmas Bonus, Mid-Year Bonuses, Anniversary Bonus), the MWSS journal and disbursement vouchers constituted substantial evidence, and her offer to refund was deemed an admission. For the housing project and car loan, the Court, citing Villareña v. COA, ruled that such benefits from a cooperative organized by and for MWSS employees, and controlled by MWSS officials, were effectively benefits from MWSS itself, an agency under her audit jurisdiction. Her defense of good faith was unavailing, as the prohibitions under R.A. No. 6758 and relevant codes of conduct were already in effect during her tenure.
The Court defined grave abuse of discretion as a capricious, whimsical, or despotic exercise of judgment equivalent to lack of jurisdiction. The COA’s decision was based on law and evidence, and its procedure observed due process; thus, no grave abuse of discretion was committed.