CA upholds dismissal of PNP chief accountant over ‘ghost’ armored vehicle repairs

The Court of Appeals has affirmed the dismissal of the Philippine National Police’s chief accountant over a repair and maintenance deal for 28 units PNP V-150 light armored vehicles in 2007 that cost the government P400 million.

 

In a decision penned by Associate Justice Maria Elisa Sempio Diy, the CA’s Fourteenth Division denied the petition filed by Antonio Retrato, former PNP chief accountant, seeking to reverse a January 18, 2013 Ombudsman resolution dismissing him from the service for grave misconduct and serious dishonesty.

 

The CA said Retrato failed to diligently perform his duties when he signed disbursement vouchers for the multimillion-peso project despite the lack of supporting documents.

 

"We made a punctilious scrutiny of the documents attached to the records to determine if these complied with the checklist. Contrary, however, to Retrato's certification, the supporting documents attached to the disbursement vouchers are, in fact, lacking,” ruled the CA.

 

"Being the chief accountant of the PNP, it can be surmised that petitioner Retrato's functions entail assiduous attention to details. As can be gleaned from the records, petitioner Retrato performs his functions in a haphazard and careless manner,” the CA added.

 

The case stemmed from the alleged ghost repair of 28 V-150 light armored vehicles in 2007 during former Director General Avelino Razon Jr.'s term as PNP chief. 

 

According to the complaint by the Office of the Ombudsman, the contract for the repair was awarded to a private supplier in June 2007 but no repair actually took place.

 

The CA said among the missing documents to support the abstract bids were purchase requests, notice or letter of award, bid tender of other participants and acceptance of the bid.

 

There were also no documents showing that the repair shops tapped for the project were duly accredited by the Department of Trade and Industry, given that the project involved major repair and general reconditioning.

 

The CA said Retrato could have “demanded” for the required documents.

 

The CA also faulted Retrato for “indiscriminately” signing documents without scrutinizing their contents, and even certified that documentary requirements have been duly complied with.

 

“Petitioner Retrato was duty bound to ensure that the documentary requisites were duly complied with before affixing his signature to the disbursement vouchers,” said the appeals court.

 

"Such action smacks of serious dishonesty as it shows distortion of truth in a matter of fact relevant to one's office or connected with the performance of one's duty," it added. — JDS/GMA News