Key Takeaway: Special Funds Must Be Used Strictly for Their Intended Purpose

Department of Agrarian Reform Employees Association v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 217285, November 10, 2020

Imagine receiving a bonus at work, only to be told years later that you must return it because it was funded from an inappropriate source. This is the reality that faced the employees of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) when the Supreme Court upheld the disallowance of their Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) incentives. The central legal question in this case was whether the DAR could legally use the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) Fund to pay these incentives.

The DAR and its employees’ association argued that the incentives were justified as they were tied to meeting performance targets. However, the Court found that the CARP Fund, a special fund designated for agrarian reform, could not be used for such purposes. This decision highlights the strict legal boundaries governing the use of government funds and the potential repercussions for both agencies and employees when these boundaries are crossed.

Understanding the Legal Framework of Government Fund Usage

In the Philippines, government funds are categorized into different types, each with specific rules governing their use. The CARP Fund, established under Executive Order No. 229, is a special fund intended exclusively for implementing agrarian reform programs. According to Section 29(3) of the Philippine Constitution, “All money collected on any tax levied for a special purpose shall be treated as a special fund and paid out for such purpose only.”

The use of special funds is further regulated by Presidential Decree No. 1445, the Government Auditing Code, which states that trust funds, similar to special funds, “shall be available and may be spent only for the specific purpose for which the trust was created or the funds received.” This principle is crucial in preventing the misuse of funds allocated for specific governmental objectives.

For example, if a local government uses funds designated for educational programs to build a community center, it would be violating the legal restrictions on the use of special funds. Such misuse can lead to disallowances by the Commission on Audit (COA), as seen in the DAR case.

The Journey of the DAR Case: From Incentives to Disallowance

The story of the DAR case began with a Collective Negotiation Agreement (CNA) signed in 2004 between DAR and its employees’ association, which included provisions for performance-based incentives. Over the next few years, DAR Regional Office No. 02 (DAR-RO2) disbursed approximately P6.6 million from the CARP Fund to its employees as incentives for meeting targets in 2008 and 2009.

However, these disbursements were flagged by the COA, leading to three Notices of Disallowance (NDs) in 2008, 2009, and 2010. The COA argued that using the CARP Fund for CNA incentives violated the legal restrictions on special funds. DAR-RO2 appealed these decisions, but both the COA Regional Office and the COA Proper upheld the disallowances.

The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, where the DAR Employees Association argued that the incentives were justified and that the employees had received them in good faith. The Court, however, disagreed, stating, “The CARP Fund could not be legally used to finance the grant of the CNA Incentive.” The Court also emphasized, “The grant of CNA Incentives financed by the CARP Fund is not only illegal but also inconsiderate of the plight of Filipino farmers for whose benefit the CARP Fund is allocated.”

The procedural journey involved multiple appeals and legal arguments, culminating in the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the disallowance and order the return of the incentives:

• DAR-RO2 disbursed CNA incentives from the CARP Fund in 2008 and 2009.
• COA issued Notices of Disallowance, which were upheld by the COA Regional Office.
• DAR-RO2 appealed to the COA Proper, which also upheld the disallowances.
• The DAR Employees Association filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court.
• The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming the COA’s decision.

Practical Implications and Key Lessons

This ruling has significant implications for government agencies and employees. Agencies must ensure that funds are used strictly for their intended purposes, as misuse can lead to legal challenges and financial liabilities. Employees, even if they receive benefits in good faith, may be required to return them if they were improperly sourced.

Key lessons from this case include:

• Strict Adherence to Fund Allocation: Government agencies must use special funds only for their designated purposes.
• Liability for Improper Disbursements: Both approving officers and recipients can be held liable for returning disallowed amounts.
• Importance of Documentation: Agencies should maintain clear documentation to justify the use of funds for any incentives or benefits.

For example, if a government agency plans to offer performance bonuses, it must ensure that these are sourced from appropriate budget allocations, such as Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) savings, and not from special funds designated for other purposes.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a special fund in the context of government finances?

A special fund is a type of government fund allocated for a specific purpose, such as the CARP Fund for agrarian reform. These funds must be used exclusively for their intended purpose.

Can government employees be required to return bonuses received in good faith?

Yes, if the bonuses were improperly sourced from a special fund, employees may be required to return them, as ruled in the DAR case.

What are the potential consequences for government agencies that misuse special funds?

Agencies may face legal challenges, financial liabilities, and disallowances by the COA if they misuse special funds.

How can government agencies ensure compliance with fund allocation rules?

Agencies should maintain clear documentation, follow legal guidelines, and ensure that funds are used only for their designated purposes.

What steps should employees take if they receive incentives from their agency?

Employees should verify the source of the incentives and ensure they are legally justified to avoid potential liabilities.

ASG Law specializes in government and administrative law. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.