🔒 Closed Daily jokes from Dogie

Boang na tatay nyo. Pahinga ka na habang buhay tatay dogie. Run free

 

[Kang Hyewon]

Tatay digz omowe kana sa dabaw plss pagod kana

 

[awinahe]

 

[bananamilk]

Under Section 2 (1), Article IX-D of the 1987 Constitution, the Commission on Audit shall have the power, authority, and duty to examine, audit x x x expenditures or uses of funds and property x x x x pertaining to x x x government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters. Under Section 5 of RA No. 10072, the Philippine Red Cross shall be allotted by the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office at least one lottery draw yearly for the support of its disaster relief operations in addition to its existing lottery draws for the Blood Program.

So ayun nkuha ko lng to sa fb. Relax and wait lng tayo kasi in fairness kay duts. No matter how b0b0 you think he is abogado prin yung tao .

 

[teapotpot]

Under Section 2 (1), Article IX-D of the 1987 Constitution, the Commission on Audit shall have the power, authority, and duty to examine, audit x x x expenditures or uses of funds and property x x x x pertaining to x x x government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters. Under Section 5 of RA No. 10072, the Philippine Red Cross shall be allotted by the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office at least one lottery draw yearly for the support of its disaster relief operations in addition to its existing lottery draws for the Blood Program.

So ayun nkuha ko lng to sa fb. Relax and wait lng tayo kasi in fairness kay duts. No matter how b0b0 you think he is abogado prin yung tao .

Base sa unang article na minention mo may authority lang ang COA sa government-owned or controlled corporations with orginal charters which doesn't include The Philippine Red Cross.

because:
The Philippine Red Cross (PRC) is an independent and autonomous non-government organization tasked to help the Philippine government in the humanitarian field and to adhere to the obligations of the Philippines to the Geneva Conventions and International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movements.
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now..

GOVERNMENT-OWNED AND CONTROLLED CORPORATIONS​

You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.

COA: We have no power to audit Red Cross​

“We do not have jurisdiction to audit the organization, yung Philippine National Red Cross,” Aguinaldo said during the deliberations on the proposed 2022 budget of the COA at the House of Representatives.

“The only thing we can audit are payments made by PhilHealth to the Red Cross but in that case what we’re auditing actually is PhilHealth in making those payments,” he added.

Under its mandate, the COA can only examine and audit government agencies and bodies.
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.

Be responsible when sharing information online. Wag na dumagdag sa mga tao na nag share ng misinformation online.

 

[bananamilk]

Base sa unang article na minention mo may authority lang ang COA sa government-owned or controlled corporations with orginal charters which doesn't include The Philippine Red Cross.

because:
The Philippine Red Cross (PRC) is an independent and autonomous non-government organization tasked to help the Philippine government in the humanitarian field and to adhere to the obligations of the Philippines to the Geneva Conventions and International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movements.
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now..

GOVERNMENT-OWNED AND CONTROLLED CORPORATIONS​

You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.

COA: We have no power to audit Red Cross​

“We do not have jurisdiction to audit the organization, yung Philippine National Red Cross,” Aguinaldo said during the deliberations on the proposed 2022 budget of the COA at the House of Representatives.

“The only thing we can audit are payments made by PhilHealth to the Red Cross but in that case what we’re auditing actually is PhilHealth in making those payments,” he added.

Under its mandate, the COA can only examine and audit government agencies and bodies.
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.

Be responsible when sharing information online. Wag na dumagdag sa mga tao na nag share ng misinformation online.

RED CROSS IS ACCOUNTABLE TO THE GOVERNMENT by Judge Marlo Campanilla
This writing is for the benefit of those who will take the bar examination. Please refrain from making a political comment or remark.
Under Section 5 of RA No. 10072, the Philippine Red Cross shall be allotted by the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office at least one lottery draw yearly for the support of its disaster relief operations in addition to its existing lottery draws for the Blood Program and shall be exempt from paying certain taxes.
Because of these privileges, Red Cross is accountable to the government especially regarding the money received from PCSO. Because of these privileges, Section 7 (b) and (h) of RA No. 10072 makes the President of the Philippines an Honorary President of Red Cross and requires Red Cross to submit to the President of the Philippines an annual report containing their activities and showing its financial condition.
Red cross is also accountable to the money that it received from PCSO, and misappropriation thereof is malversation. As a rule, only accountable government officer can be held liable for malversation under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code. However, under Article 222 of the Code, the provision on malversation shall apply to a private individual (e.g., officers of Red Cross) who in whatever capacity have charge of any insular (government) funds (e.g., PCSO funds).


It is my submission “for academic and bar exam purposes” that COA has the authority to audit the use of Red Cross of the money given by Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office. In fact, officers of Red Cross can also be held liable for failure for render an accounting under Article 218 in relation to Article 222 of the Revised Penal Code.

I'm not sure if I can share an fb page here so yan. He is a judge and author of law books so hindi siguro fake news yan. Tsaka gaya ng sabi ko relax and wait for a conclusion kasi tbh these legal matters mga abogado ang higit na makaka intindi jan. It's his opinion nmn buttressed with citations so I felt it's worth a share.

 

[teapotpot]

It is my submission “for academic and bar exam purposes” that COA has the authority to audit the use of Red Cross of the money given by Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office.

I just want to point this out, that at the end of the day it's only his study as stated above. Because if the government or COA itself will not honor his study it won't matter. And yes it didn't matter, why? because the Chairperson of COA already declared that they don't have power to audit PRC.

 

[bananamilk]

I just want to point this out, that at the end of the day it's only his study as stated above. Because if the government or COA itself will not honor his study it won't matter. And yes it didn't matter, why? because the Chairperson of COA already declared that they don't have power to audit PRC.

It's a legal opinion. Check out the context of my reply. If you check out the posts above mine b0b0ng sila kay duts. So here I'm showing you that someone, a judge, may also come up with this sort of explanation kahit hindi kayo impressed kay Duterte nakaka intindi ng batas yung tao.

Tsaka pag ang source of funds eh from tax/govt. Subject to COA audit yan kahit private sila. Ayaw mag audit ng COA? Hmmmn discretionary ba ang mag audit? Hmmmn d ko alam abangan

 

[teapotpot]

It's a legal opinion. Check out the context of my reply. If you check out the posts above mine b0b0ng sila kay duts. So here I'm showing you that someone, a judge, may also come up with this sort of explanation kahit hindi kayo impressed kay Duterte nakaka intindi ng batas yung tao.

Tsaka pag ang source of funds eh from tax/govt. Subject to COA audit yan kahit private sila. Ayaw mag audit ng COA? Hmmmn discretionary ba ang mag audit? Hmmmn d ko alam abangan

Yes that's what I'm trying to say "It's a legal opinion." and still it's just an "opinion". Any opinion or even a study wouldn't matter if it's not recognized. That's why COA can't audit PRC in the first place.

Any one can submit their own opinion sure, but if not approved or recognized it wouldn't matter.

 

[bananamilk]

Yes that's what I'm trying to say "It's a legal opinion." and still it's just an "opinion". Any opinion or even a study wouldn't matter if it's not give an honor. That's why COA won't audit PRC in the first place.

That stance will hurt people who find Duts super b0b0. Won't vs Can't spells the difference when you scream transparency noh? You demand transparency on one side and turn a blind eye on the others not favorable to you. Anyways I like Gordon and PRC is an instrumentality that earns its keep.

 

[teapotpot]

That stance will hurt people who find Duts super b0b0. Won't vs Can't spells the difference when you scream transparency noh? You demand transparency on one side and turn a blind eye on the others not favorable to you. Anyways I like Gordon and PRC is an instrumentality that earns its keep.

mb edited can't cuz they don't have power not because they don't want to.

 

[teapotpot]

Ayaw mag audit ng COA? Hmmmn discretionary ba ang mag audit? Hmmmn d ko alam abangan

Well, si Duts daw pag maging VP siya

 

[bananamilk]

Well, si Duts daw pag maging VP siya

ASA siya. Pinagsasabi ng matandang yan

 

[bananamilk]

mb edited can't cuz they don't have power not because they don't want to.

Can talaga ang opinion nya I went back to check. Kasi source of funds eh govt/tax money. Kahit non government entity pwede kasi its not the entity but the funds na concern ng COA.

Art 9: (D) SECTION 2 (1) 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.

Anyways abangan nalang talaga ang susunod na kabanata .

 

[teapotpot]

Can talaga ang opinion nya I went back to check. Kasi source of funds eh govt/tax money. Kahit non government entity pwede kasi its not the entity but the funds na concern ng COA.

Art 9: (D) SECTION 2 (1) 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.

Anyways abangan nalang talaga ang susunod na kabanata .

Eto na talaga yung offical statement at reason kung bakit di pwedeng iaudit ng COA ang PRC, meron pala sila official statement ngayon ko lang nakita.

Source: Philippine Red Cross twitter

Base sa statements sa 4th paragraph "The bulk of our funds come from private donations of generous individuals, corporations, and partner international Red Cross and Red Crescent societies who trust in our ability to deliver life-saving services to the most vulnerable. Sometimes, agencies like the DOH, BSP, PCSO choose to voluntarily donate to the PRC for specific programs."

So clearly they are given voluntary donations that means this doesn't apply to PRC:
"Art 9: (D) SECTION 2 (1) 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."
Because it's in the form of "donation" not "subsidy or equity".

Base sa statements sa 2nd to the last paragraph "The PRC audit is conducted by a private international accounting firm which is also the auditor of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies which receives a copy of the independent audit report." So may nag aaudit naman pala sa PRC at isa lang yung nag aaudit sa lahat ng Red Cross pati yung sa ibang bansa.

So it makes sense kung bakit hindi pwedeng iaudit ng COA ang PRC kasi:
1. They are independent that means they are not being run by the government funds.
2. They are not getting subsidy or equity from government agencies they only get "donations".

All reason can be concluded from the Philippine Red Cross statements above.

 

[bananamilk]

Eto na talaga yung offical statement at reason kung bakit di pwedeng iaudit ng COA ang PRC, meron pala sila official statement ngayon ko lang nakita.

Source: Philippine Red Cross twitter
View attachment 1603293
View attachment 1603294

Base sa statements sa 4th paragraph "The bulk of our funds come from private donations of generous individuals, corporations, and partner international Red Cross and Red Crescent societies who trust in our ability to deliver life-saving services to the most vulnerable. Sometimes, agencies like the DOH, BSP, PCSO choose to voluntarily donate to the PRC for specific programs."

So clearly they are given voluntary donations that means this doesn't apply to PRC:
"Art 9: (D) SECTION 2 (1) 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."
Because it's in the form of "donation" not "subsidy or equity".

Base sa statements sa 2nd to the last paragraph "The PRC audit is conducted by a private international accounting firm which is also the auditor of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies which receives a copy of the independent audit report." So may nag aaudit naman pala sa PRC at isa lang yung nag aaudit sa lahat ng Red Cross pati yung sa ibang bansa.

So it makes sense kung bakit hindi pwedeng iaudit ng COA ang PRC kasi:
1. They are independent that means they are not being run by the government funds.
2. They are not getting subsidy or equity from government agencies they only get "donations".

All reason can be concluded from the Philippine Red Cross statements above.

Ang liit d ko mabasa. Anyways abangan parin ang susunod na kabanata because Duts has the tendency to go after his critics. Ang saya pareho silang abogado so popcorn pls.

Again. It's not the entity but the source of funds. Donation is still govt money. Purpose doesn't matter for as long as galing sa general appropriations ang Pera it's still within the ambit of COA.
Auditor lang nmn ang COA they check documents kung sakto sa balance sheets kung ayaw nila abangan nalang kung may financial statements na mapupunta sa kamay ng presidente later. May power of supervision pala siya sa PRC eh.

Atsaka the mere fact that private auditors conduct audit will not divest COA of its power to examine and audit the same gov't agency or instrumentality. COA can still audit and findings and conclusions will still bind the A/I and their officials.

Lastly even subsidiaries of GOCC na purely business ang purpose subject parin sa COA post audit to think labor code saklaw sa employees nila pwede iaudit. Ano pa yung tumatanggap ng govt money .

 

[teapotpot]

Again. It's not the entity but the source of funds. Donation is still govt money. Purpose doesn't matter for as long as galing sa general appropriations ang Pera it's still within the ambit of COA.

I would have to disagree with you because "The bulk of our funds come from private donations of generous individuals, corporations, and partner international Red Cross and Red Crescent societies who trust in our ability to deliver life-saving services to the most vulnerable. Sometimes, agencies like the DOH, BSP, PCSO choose to voluntarily donate to the PRC for specific programs." Not government money. PRC is not funded by government money.

The donated money from government agencies are government money right? But it's given as a "DONATION" not as a "SUBSIDY or EQUITY".

Kasi ang sinabi lang naman masasama ka lang sa audit kapag binigyan ka ng "SUBSIDY or EQUITY" galing sa government.

"Art 9: (D) SECTION 2 (1) 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."

Oo pera pa din ng gobyerno yung ginamit sa pag donate pero donation lang yun, yung donation wala naman kasamang condition, pero yung subsidy at equity at may kasamang condition.

Kapag binigyan ang PRC ng isang government agency ng SUBSIDY = sakop ka ng Article 9-D Section 2 (1)
Kapag binigyan ang PRC ng isang government agency ng EQUITY = sakop ka ng Article 9-D Section 2 (1)
Kapag ang isang government agency ay nag DONATE sa PRC = hindi kana sakop ng Article 9-D Section 2 (1)

Kasi yung donation ay bigay lang it doesn't matter kung pera ng gobyerno yan wala naman nakalagay sa constitution na kapag binigyan ng pera ang isang NGO ay pwede ng iaudit, ang nakalagay lang may condition kapag binigyan ng SUBSIDY or EQUITY.

SUBSIDY ≠ DONATION
EQUITY ≠ DONATION

Pag SUBSIDY = may condition
Pag EQUITY = may condition
Pag DONATION = walang condition or walang kapalit

Gets na ba? hahahaha

 

[teapotpot]

Lastly even subsidiaries of GOCC na purely business ang purpose subject parin sa COA post audit to think labor code saklaw sa employees nila pwede iaudit. Ano pa yung tumatanggap ng govt money .

Of course kasi hindi naman independent ang mga subsidiaries under pa din sila ng Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations. And as the name suggests ang GOCC ay under government.

GOVERNMENT > GOCC > GOCC Subsidiaries they are still under one roof.

 

[bananamilk]

I would have to disagree with you because "The bulk of our funds come from private donations of generous individuals, corporations, and partner international Red Cross and Red Crescent societies who trust in our ability to deliver life-saving services to the most vulnerable. Sometimes, agencies like the DOH, BSP, PCSO choose to voluntarily donate to the PRC for specific programs." Not government money. PRC is not funded by government money.

The donated money from government agencies are government money right? But it's given as a "DONATION" not as a "SUBSIDY or EQUITY".

Kasi ang sinabi lang naman masasama ka lang sa audit kapag binigyan ka ng "SUBSIDY or EQUITY" galing sa government.

"Art 9: (D) SECTION 2 (1) 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."

Oo pera pa din ng gobyerno yung ginamit sa pag donate pero donation lang yun, yung donation wala naman kasamang condition, pero yung subsidy at equity at may kasamang condition.

Kapag binigyan ang PRC ng isang government agency ng SUBSIDY = sakop ka ng Article 9-D Section 2 (1)
Kapag binigyan ang PRC ng isang government agency ng EQUITY = sakop ka ng Article 9-D Section 2 (1)
Kapag ang isang government agency ay nag DONATE sa PRC = hindi kana sakop ng Article 9-D Section 2 (1)

Kasi yung donation ay bigay lang it doesn't matter kung pera ng gobyerno yan wala naman nakalagay sa constitution na kapag binigyan ng pera ang isang NGO ay pwede ng iaudit, ang nakalagay lang may condition kapag binigyan ng SUBSIDY or EQUITY.

SUBSIDY ≠ DONATION
EQUITY ≠ DONATION

Pag SUBSIDY = may condition
Pag EQUITY = may condition
Pag DONATION = walang condition or walang kapalit

Gets na ba? hahahaha

Wrong application in this case. Kasi government money will always follow the yearly budget. Lahat yan detailed sa appropriations bill na yearly pinapasa ng Congress. In case of savings/money not spent. Govt agency has to account for those at ibalik sa national treasury ang excess money. When funds are realigned it must be within the branch. If you send money from exec to legislative like DAP case which was declared unconstitutional eh cross border transfer yun which is NOT allowed. What more ibigay sa isang NGO? If you want to argue na private ang PRC baket sila binibigyan ng donation? Malversation yan siiiiirrr kung ang extra money eh pinamimigay kung feel ng government agency. So the conclusion is sinasali sila sa budget? So balik sa general appropriations? .

Of course kasi hindi naman independent ang mga subsidiaries under pa din sila ng Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations. And as the name suggests ang GOCC ay under government.

GOVERNMENT > GOCC > GOCC Subsidiaries they are still under one roof.

Correct subsidiaries are still under roof but wrong classification. GOCC kasi there's w/ charter and those created under general law. Hindi lahat ng GOCC eh performing governmental functions. Meron 100% negosyo lang not created by congress under any law specific or general law. Case in point Manila Hotel negosyo siya
ng GSIS para paikot ng pera ng members Not govt money.

 

[teapotpot]

Wrong application in this case. Kasi government money will always follow the yearly budget. Lahat yan detailed sa appropriations bill na yearly pinapasa ng Congress. In case of savings/money not spent. Govt agency has to account for those at ibalik sa national treasury ang excess money. When funds are realigned it must be within the branch. If you send money from exec to legislative like DAP case which was declared unconstitutional eh cross border transfer yun which is NOT allowed. What more ibigay sa isang NGO? If you want to argue na private ang PRC baket sila binibigyan ng donation? Malversation yan siiiiirrr kung ang extra money eh pinamimigay kung feel ng government agency. So the conclusion is sinasali sila sa budget? So balik sa general appropriations? .

Then you are saying that they are lying when they said sometimes some gov't agencies give them donation? PRC
"Sometimes, agencies like the DOH, BSP, PCSO choose to voluntarily donate to the PRC for specific programs."

Most of they're funds are form donations.
"The bulk of our funds come from private donations of generous individuals, corporations, and partner international Red Cross and Red Crescent societies who trust in our ability to deliver life-saving services to the most vulnerable."