LO-106S2010 - Department of the Interior and Local Government

LO-106S2010 - Department of the Interior and Local Government LO-106S2010 - Department of the Interior and Local Government

13.07.2015 Views

Republic of the PhilippinesDEPARTMENT OF THE INTEBIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTA. Francisco cold Condominium ll Bldg, EDSAcorner Mapagmahal St., Diliman, Quezon CityLEGAL SERVICEVICE-I,IAYOR CARLITO V. DE1A CRUZSanto Tomas, La UnionDear Vice-Mayor dela Cruz:DILG OPINION NO. 106 S. 2OIO'Jo* 2 Y 2611This has reference to your earlier letter asking our legal opinion on thefollowing queries, to wit:Mayor and signing travel order of the Sangguniang BayanMember is ministerial.2, Whether or not the Municipal Budget Officer,Municipal Treasurer and the Municipal Accounting Officercould lawfully and validly facilitate the cash advance of theSangguniang Official and its employees supporting only travelwhich not acted by the Municipal Mayor within four (41working days after receipt hereof.- 3. Is the Municipal Mayor, Mun. Accountant, Mun.Treasurer who refuses unjustifiably to sign document after arequest has been make (sic) be held liable adrninistratively orcriminally?"In reply thereto, please be informed that this Department had alreadyanswered similar queries in I)ll,() ()ltittiott No. ol, seric:,^ ol'eoot'. In the saidlegal opinion, we opined that the Municipal Mayor, being the chlef executive whoexercise general supervision and control over all programs, projects, services andactivities of the municipal government, is given the sole J]ICISSe!ryC to authorizeofficial trips outside of the municipality of municipal officials and employees.This is oart and oarcel of the executive function of the municipal mavor.It becomes a ministerial duty on the part of the municipal mayor toauthorize trips, including the issuance of corresponding travel orders therefore tomembers of the sangguniang bayan and its employees whenever the municipalvice-mayor had already issued his prior recommendation thereto and had alreadysigned the warrant drawn on the municipal treasury for all expendituresnecessary for such official travel chargeable to the sanggunian fund.With regard to your second query, we also opined therein that after thelapse of 15 days from the time the Municipal Mayor received the request forissuance of travel order under his ministerial duty, the Municipal Budget Officerand the Municipal Accountant could lawfully and validly facilitate the cashadvance of the sanggunian officials and its employees. The unjustifiable refusalof the aforesaid municipal officials to facilitate the cash advance within the

Republic <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> PhilippinesDEPARTMENT OF THE INTEBIOR AND <strong>LO</strong>CAL GOVERNMENTA. Francisco cold Condominium ll Bldg, EDSAcorner Mapagmahal St., Diliman, Quezon CityLEGAL SERVICEVICE-I,IAYOR CARLITO V. DE1A CRUZSanto Tomas, La UnionDear Vice-Mayor dela Cruz:DILG OPINION NO. 106 S. 2OIO'Jo* 2 Y 2611This has reference to your earlier letter asking our legal opinion on <strong>the</strong>following queries, to wit:Mayor <strong>and</strong> signing travel order <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Sangguniang BayanMember is ministerial.2, Whe<strong>the</strong>r or not <strong>the</strong> Municipal Budget Officer,Municipal Treasurer <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Municipal Accounting Officercould lawfully <strong>and</strong> validly facilitate <strong>the</strong> cash advance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>Sangguniang Official <strong>and</strong> its employees supporting only travelwhich not acted by <strong>the</strong> Municipal Mayor within four (41working days after receipt here<strong>of</strong>.- 3. Is <strong>the</strong> Municipal Mayor, Mun. Accountant, Mun.Treasurer who refuses unjustifiably to sign document after arequest has been make (sic) be held liable adrninistratively orcriminally?"In reply <strong>the</strong>reto, please be informed that this <strong>Department</strong> had alreadyanswered similar queries in I)ll,() ()ltittiott No. ol, seric:,^ ol'eoot'. In <strong>the</strong> saidlegal opinion, we opined that <strong>the</strong> Municipal Mayor, being <strong>the</strong> chlef executive whoexercise general supervision <strong>and</strong> control over all programs, projects, services <strong>and</strong>activities <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> municipal government, is given <strong>the</strong> sole J]ICISSe!ryC to authorize<strong>of</strong>ficial trips outside <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> municipality <strong>of</strong> municipal <strong>of</strong>ficials <strong>and</strong> employees.This is oart <strong>and</strong> oarcel <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> executive function <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> municipal mavor.It becomes a ministerial duty on <strong>the</strong> part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> municipal mayor toauthorize trips, including <strong>the</strong> issuance <strong>of</strong> corresponding travel orders <strong>the</strong>refore tomembers <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sangguniang bayan <strong>and</strong> its employees whenever <strong>the</strong> municipalvice-mayor had already issued his prior recommendation <strong>the</strong>reto <strong>and</strong> had alreadysigned <strong>the</strong> warrant drawn on <strong>the</strong> municipal treasury for all expendituresnecessary for such <strong>of</strong>ficial travel chargeable to <strong>the</strong> sanggunian fund.With regard to your second query, we also opined <strong>the</strong>rein that after <strong>the</strong>lapse <strong>of</strong> 15 days from <strong>the</strong> time <strong>the</strong> Municipal Mayor received <strong>the</strong> request forissuance <strong>of</strong> travel order under his ministerial duty, <strong>the</strong> Municipal Budget Officer<strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Municipal Accountant could lawfully <strong>and</strong> validly facilitate <strong>the</strong> cashadvance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> sanggunian <strong>of</strong>ficials <strong>and</strong> its employees. The unjustifiable refusal<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> aforesaid municipal <strong>of</strong>ficials to facilitate <strong>the</strong> cash advance within <strong>the</strong>


aforesaid period is a sufficient ground for <strong>the</strong> filing <strong>of</strong> an administrative caseagainst <strong>the</strong>m.Hereto attached is a photocopy <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> aforesaid DILG Opinion for yourready perusal.Thank you <strong>and</strong> warm regards.Very truly yours,BY AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY:V-,.LvrT/'

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!