G.R. No. 231871, July 6, 2021
GLADYS MINERVA N. BILIBLI, DARROW P. ODSEY, AND ZENAIDA BRIGIDA H. PAWID, PETITIONERS, VS. COMMISSION ON AUDIT, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioners are officials and employees of the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP). They availed of a scholarship program intended to develop their skills and competencies to better serve indigenous peoples. The Commission on Audit issued a Notice of Disallowance for the scholarship funds on the ground that the NCIP had no basis to allocate funds for such a program.

ISSUE

Whether the recipients of the disallowed scholarship funds, as well as the approving and certifying officers, should be excused from returning the disallowed amounts.

RULING

Yes. The concurring opinion agrees with the main decision’s ruling to excuse the return of the disallowed amounts. It applies Rule 2(d) of the rules in Madera v. Commission on Audit, which allows the Court to excuse the return of recipients based on undue prejudice, social justice considerations, and other bona fide exceptions. The opinion finds the presence of such exceptional circumstances in this case. First, the case involves officials and employees of the NCIP, some of whom may be members of indigenous cultural communities—a sector specifically recognized and protected by the Constitution as vulnerable and marginalized. Second, the knowledge gained from the scholarship program contributes to the capacity-building of the NCIP, the government agency tasked to protect and promote the interests of indigenous cultural communities. The scholarship program is laudable as it upgrades the quality of human resources to improve the NCIP’s efficiency. Requiring the return of the disallowed amount would be inequitable, as the skills gained will ultimately be utilized in serving indigenous cultural communities. Thus, social justice considerations and other bona fide reasons warrant excusing the return.