Ombud clears 8 CTU officials

THE Office of the Ombudsman has cleared eight officials of the Cebu Technological University (CTU) of allegations that they illegally released representation expenses worth P63,000 to a school official who is not legally entitled to it in 2013.

Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales approved the motion for reconsideration filed by the school officials, who were dismissed from service for grave misconduct.

“Under the circumstances of this case, there is no probable cause to charge respondents with a crime or to hold them administratively liable,” said the Ombudsman’s order.

Last Dec. 16, the anti-graft office dismissed from service former CTU president Bonifacio Villanueva and former CTU vice president for administration Rodolfo Burgos.

Also dismissed were Jerlito Letrondo, university chief administrative officer; Normita Mejala, finance manager II; Gilminarde Santos, accountant IV; Ruth Manga-ay, university disbursing officer; Pontiano Bontia, campus director; and Ruel Tillor, internal auditor.

Villanueva retired from service just before the filing of the complaint, while Burgos died in 2013.

The case stemmed from the complaint filed by Eugenio Ermac, assistant professor II and CTU faculty president, before the Ombudsman.

Ermar alleged that the university provided a P3,000 monthly payment to Santos from August 2011 to April 2013 as reimbursement for his representation allowance.

The payments, however, were disallowed by the Commission on Audit in 2014.

The auditors said that Santos is ineligibile to receive a representation allowance.

State auditors also found that the payments made to reimburse Santos were for personal expenses, such as grocery purchases and restaurant meals in Metro Manila and the cities of Cebu, Tacloban, Ormoc, Talisay, Mandaue, Lapu-Lapu and Cagayan de Oro.

Replying to the charges, Santos, in his counter-affidavit, argued that the university’s Board of Management approved a resolution authorizing the reimbursement.

The other respondents shared the same view with Santos and added they just relied on the board resolution.

In their motion for reconsideration, the respondents attached a copy of the resolution.

They also argued that the school board is not a bogus body.

The respondents also submitted a copy of the notice of settlement of disallowance, which showed that Santos paid the disallowed stipend.

The Ombudsman then held that the respondents merely relied in good faith on the school board’s resolution in granting reimbursement to Santos.

Trending

No stories found.

Just in

No stories found.

Branded Content

No stories found.
SunStar Publishing Inc.
www.sunstar.com.ph