CoA nixes additional pay for ex-Honolulu consulate chief

Commission on Audit (INQUIRER FILE PHOTO)

MANILA — The Commission on Audit has denied the request of former Honolulu Consul-General Rolando Gregorio to be paid an additional P2.04 million in salaries and allowances during the time he extended his tenure beyond his retirement.

In a recently released four-page decision dated Feb. 28, the CoA said Gregorio could not have rendered government services from Jan. 1 to June 17, 2005, because he did not have the Office of the President’s approval to continue working past his retirement on Apr. 17, 2004.

It gave weight to the Department of Foreign Affairs’ 2015 statement that Gregorio only rendered actual service until Dec. 31, 2004, which was covered by OP authorization.

Gregorio claimed to be owed P119,487.50 in unpaid salary and P1.92 million in overseas allowance and living quarters allowance for the period of Jan. 1 to June 17, 2005.

But, the CoA found that then-Foreign Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo only requested another extension of Gregorio’s service on April 21, 2005. Then Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita on May 19, 2005, approved the extension to last until June 30.

The CoA said paying Gregorio would be contrary to Section 3 of the Executive Order No. 136, which required officials to secure the Office of the President’s authority in order to be allowed to continue their tenure beyond their retirement.

“Absent such authority, Consul General Gregorio cannot assume or continue in office and claim for benefit for that period,” the decision read.

Moreover, Section 4 of the said executive order only allowed the extension of services for a maximum of one year beyond retirement. Romulo only requested the extension of his tenure four days past the maximum period.

The CoA added that Section 2 of the order bars retired officers from being retained in government service “except for exemplary meritorious reasons,” which the documents in Gregorio’s case did not show.

Gregorio also failed to show that he actually rendered services in 2005, the CoA said. It cited the belated approval of the request for extension, the lack of a certificate of assumption, and the existence of a certificate of clearance on March 31, 2005, which cleared him of any accountability with the consulate.  SFM