No pay for election officers

CEBU, Philippines - With preparations for the 2016 polls up and running, the Commission on Audit reminded local government units not to pay election officers assigned at their localities.

COA said election officers are not among the national government officials mentioned in the Compensation Policy Guidelines No. 98-1 who are allowed to receive honoraria from the muni-cipality where they are assigned.

 In its 2013 audit report, COA observed that the towns of Balamban and Asturias in Cebu paid P55,000 and P36,000, respectively, but COA recommended that the election officers refund the honoraria they have received.

 The towns gave the honoraria based on Section 447 (XI) of Republic Act No. 7160 or the Local Government Code of 1991, which states that “when the finances of the muni-cipal government allow, provide for additional allowances and other benefits to judges, prosecutors, public elementary and high school teachers, and other national government officials stationed in or assigned to the municipality.” 

 However, the state auditor cited Section 2.0 of the Compensation Policy Guidelines No. 98-1, which classifies other national government officials.

COA said these national government officials may collect additional compensation in the form of honoraria from the LGU where they are assigned as provided under section 5.0 of Local Budget Circular 62: Prosecutors, (Provincial/City Fiscals) and their Assistants of the Department of Justice, Judges of Regional Trial Courts/Municipal Trial Courts/Municipal Trial Courts in Cities/Municipal Trial Courts of the Supreme Courts, Clerks of Court in RTC’s and MTC’s in cities, Fire Station Commander of the Bureau of Fire and Protection, Police Station Commander of the Philippine National Police, Municipal Government Operations Officer of the Department of Interior and Local Government, and Public School Teachers.

“The Election Officer of the Commission on Election was not among the national government official mentioned who are allowed to receive honoraria from the municipality where they are assigned, thus the grant was illegal,” the audit report reads.  (FREEMAN)