DELA LLANA V.
Decisions of the Commission (Decisions and orders of the COA
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 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
Article IX. A. Common Provisions, Section 7.
reviewable by the court via a petition for certiorari refer to the COAs
quasi-judicial capacity not its quasi-legislative or rule-making powers)
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