DOJ Opinion No. 045, s. 2000

DOJ OPINION NO. 045 , s. 2000 May 31, 2000 Secretary Edgardo J. Angara Department of Agriculture Elliptical Road, Diliman, Quezon City Sir : This refers to your letter requesting this department to render opinion on the legality of the transfer of the Catanduanes Agricultural Support Programme (CatAg) funds to the Agricultural and Rural Development for Catanduanes, Inc. (ARDCI), a non-government organization, that evolved from the savings and loan system established by CatAg in line with the objectives of the Financing Memorandum between the Government of the Philippines and the European Union, which transfer of funds is to be effected through a Memorandum of Agreement. cdll You state that last December 1999, the Department of Agriculture, the European Union and the ARDCI, represented by their duly designated heads, entered into a Memorandum of Agreement effecting the transfer of the revolving loan fund amounting to P40 million to ARDCI to continue the savings and loan system; that CatAg is in the process of requesting the European Union to extend such program's life from May 2000 to December 2002 to implement the Transition/Consolidation Phase through Rider No. 4 to the Financing Memorandum; and that the National Economic and Development Authority will endorse Rider No. 4 if this Department renders a favorable opinion on the issue. With deep regret, this Department is constrained to decline rendition of the opinion requested for the following reasons: First . The subject of the query principally pertains to the transfer of funds of a government agency to a non-government office (NGO). Article IX-D, Section 2 (1) of the 1987 Constitution states that: "The Commission on Audit (COA) shall have the power, authority, and duty to examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of funds and property, owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to, the Government, or any of is subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including, government-owned and controlled corporations with original charters, and on post audit basis: . . . (D) Such non-governmental entities receiving subsidy or equity directly or indirectly, from or through the government, which are required by law or the granting institution to submit to such audit as a condition of subsidy or equity."(See also Section 11, Book V Subtitle B, E.O. No. 292, Administrative Code of 1987). Thus, any transaction that involves funds pertaining to the government must be first subjected to the rules and regulations enforced by the COA. By established precedents, the Secretary of Justice has consistently refrained from expressing his views on matters that fall within the primary jurisdiction of another office or agency, unless upon request of the head of the office or agency concerned (Secretary of Justice Op. No. 95, s. 1987; No. 19, s. 1993; No. 146, s. 1994; and Nos. 19, 56, and 60, s. 1996). cdphil The COA should first be accorded the opportunity to consider the aforementioned MOA effecting the transfer of funds, as it involves matters within its policy-sphere and jurisdiction. This time honored policy is dictated not only by practical considerations but by a sincere respect for the expertise on, and familiarity with, the policies relating to the subject, and the rightful exercise of jurisdiction by a constitutional office (ibid. No. 1, 1983) Second . The aforesaid query necessarily involves an interpretation of the rules, regulations and circulars of the Department of Budget and Management (DBM). Pursuant to the Administrative Code of 1987 (E.O. No. 292), the DBM shall be responsible for the efficient and sound utilization of government funds and revenue to effectively achieve our country's development objectives (Section 2 Chapter 1, Title XVII, E.O. No. 292). The Secretary of Justice does not render opinion or express any comment on questions that deal with the interpretation of the rules, regulations and circulars of another office or agency, unless requested by the promulgating agency concerned, since such matters are best left to the determination of the promulgating agency by reason of its familiarity with the intent and purposes of the issuance and the extent of the application (Secretary of Justice Op. No. 97, s. 1982 and No. 74, 1989). Third . The resolution of the issue would inevitably involve the examination and review of the subject MOA entered into by the DA, the EU and the ARDCI. The said MOA partakes of a contract, which by settled policy and precedents, the Secretary of Justice does not review, since contract review calls for the legal examination of the contract on a general basis and not on specific legal issues. By law, the Secretary of Justice renders opinions only on specific questions of law arising in the performance of the powers and duties of the national government functionary requesting the opinion (Ibid. No. 45, s. 1997; and No. 33, current series) It is suggested that subject query be referred to the COA and DBM inasmuch as it involves issues within their policy-sphere and jurisdiction. LexLib Very truly yours, (SGD.) ARTEMIO G. TUQUERO Acting Secretary