DELA LLANA V.
Common Provisions, Section
COMMISSION ON AUDIT
FACTS:
COA issued Circular No. 82-195, lifting the
pre-audit system of government financial
transactions
o Circular affirmed state policy that all
resources of the gov shall be managed,
expended, or utilized in accordance with
law and regulations, and safeguarded
against loss or wastage through illegal or
improper disposition
After 1986 Revolution, grave irregularities and
anomalies in governments financial
transactions were uncovered pre-audit was
reinstated thru another Circular
When political system and gov operations
stabilized, COA issued Circular 89-299, again
lifted pre-audit of national government
agencies (NGAs) and GOCCs
o Circular 89-299 further provided that pre-
audit activities retained by the COA shall no
longer be pre-requisite to the
Article IX. A.
7.
Decisions of the Commission (Decisions and orders
of the COA reviewable by the court via a petition for
certiorari refer to the COAs quasi-judicial capacity
not its quasi-legislative or rule-making powers)
implementation or prosecution of projects
and payment of claims
COA later issued Circular 94-006 to include
LGUs in the lifting of pre-audit activities
It also issued COA Circular 89-299, as
amended by Circular 89-299A, Section3.2
provides that when the internal control system
of a gov agency is inadequate, COA may
reinstitute the pre-audit system or other control
measures necessary to protect the funds and
property of the agency
COA then issued Circular 2009-002, which
reinstituted the selective pre-audit due to
the rising incidents of irregular, illegal, wasteful
and anomalous disbursement of huge amounts
of public funds
COA later lifted this with Circular 2011-002
because of heightened vigilance of gov
agencies in safeguarding resources
Dela Llana wrote to COA regarding
recommendation that Department of
 Agriculture set up an internal pre-audit
service
Petitioner alleges that the pre-audit duty on the
part of the COA cannot be lifted by a mere
circular, considering that pre-audit is a
constitutional mandate enshrined in Section 2
of Article IX-D of Constitution
o That because of lack of pre-audit, serious
irregularities in government transactions
have been committed
Respondents argue for dismissal of petition
because of its defective form and that certiorari
not proper remedy
o Defective: failure to allege material dates
such as receipt of a copy of the circular, to
attach certified true copy of the asailed
order
Respondents argue that circular is valid COA
had power to promulgate it
ISSUE:
Whether petitioner is entitled to the extraordinary
writ of certiorari to assail the Circular 89-299 NO
HELD:
Procedural issues
Respondents aver that a petition for certiorari
is not proper in this case as there is no
indication that the writ is directed against a
tribunal, a board, or an officer exercising
judicial or quasi-judicial functions
Conversely, petitioner claims that certiorari is
proper under Section 7, Article IX-A of the
Constitution
o Any decision, order, or ruling of each
Commission may be brought to the SC on
certiorari by the aggrieved party within 30
days from receipt of a copy
Petitioner is correct in that decisions and
orders of the COA are reviewable by the
court via a petition for certiorari
o HOWEVER, these refer to decisions and
orders which were rendered by the
COA in its quasi-judicial capacity
 o Circular 89-299 was promulgated by
the COA under its quasi-legislative or
rule-making power
o HENCE, it is not reviewable by
certiorari

A petition for prohibition is not also

appropriate in this case because it only lies
against judicial or ministerial functions, but not
against legislative or quasi-legislative functions
SC decided to set aside technical issues to
resolve merits due to seriousness of the
allegations of grave deficiency in observing a
constitutional duty

PRE-AUDIT examination of financial

transactions before their consumption or
payment
Conduct of pre-audit is not mandatory that the
SC may compel the COA to perform
It is within the COAs discretion to do so in line
with its vested exclusive authority to defined
the scope of its audit and examination