PAGCOR issues the licenses and monitors all existing licensees for compliance.

Any limited company interested

in getting a license can apply for one. The application itself costs $40,000 and then there's a $48,000 fee for the

first year once approved. Licenses are renewed each year after that for $60,000 per year.

License holders can offer their services to anyone outside the Philippines and may take advantage of the country's

highly developed internet infrastructure. The close proximity of the Philippines to the rest of Asia and its high level

of development make it an attractive base of operations for any company interested in tapping the Asian market.

All game systems must be tested and approved, and the company must keep an adequate amount of cash on hand

to cover all player balances. The licensing commission is strict on these rules, and it does a good job of enforcing

the regulations.

Driver's license in the Philippines are one of three types, student permit, non-professional driver's license,
andprofessional driver's license. The minimum age for driving in the Philippines is 18 years old provided that the
driver has a student permit and is accompanied by a person with a valid driver's license. An applicant can only
apply for a non-professional driver's license one month after acquiring a student permit and 6 months after for a
professional driver's license. An applicant must pass both the Land Transportation Office written exam and
a driving exam. If the applicant fails the tests, he must wait for a month before being able to take the tests again.

Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/714132/lto-finally-starts-issuing-drivers-license-cards#ixzz4JpnsDWTF

Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/809206/csc-clarifies-dutertes-order-to-fire-ex-presidents-

men#ixzz4KQfy7stS
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook
The Department of Agrarian Reform’s (DAR) performance last year was dismal, according to state auditors.

In its annual report released on Wednesday, the Commission on Audit (COA) said DAR distributed to farmers

only 18 percent out of its targeted 198,631 hectares, and zero land distribution in the Autonomous Region in

Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) in 2015.

The DAR only managed to issue agrarian reform beneficiaries emancipation patents or certificates of land

ownership awards covering a total 35,563 hectares last year, according to the COA.

ADVERTISEMENT

The COA said the land acquisition and distribution rate averaged only 19 percent in 27 provinces, while the rest of

the provinces no longer set new targets but only processed landholdings that were already in the pipeline for

distribution.

Nevertheless, the DAR spent a total P3.6 billion or 71 percent of the funds released for land acquisition and

distribution.

“While funds intended for inspection, verification and approval of surveys for

ARMM were fully obligated, there was a reported zero accomplishment,” the COA noted.

The COA noted the slow process of land acquisition and distribution under the past DAR administration, taking a

year up to two years when the normal processing time should have been 196 working days.

Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/802765/dar-failed-auditors-say#ixzz4KTgiIP2f

Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook
As much as P6.39 billion in funds for the government’s conditional cash transfer (CCT) program has not been

liquidated as of 2015, including payouts from 2008 to 2014, according to the Commission on Audit (COA).

Some P1.579 billion in funds meant for CCT beneficiaries have remained idle in state-owned Land Bank of the

Philippines and its conduits over five years of the Aquino administration, state auditors said.

Almost 400,000 accounts of the beneficiaries did not reflect any withdrawals since the accounts were opened,

amounting to P139 million in total, the COA said in a consolidated audit report released this week.

ADVERTISEMENT

These were some of COA’s observations in a general audit of government projects funded by official development

assistance (ODA) for 2015.

Also known as 4Ps (Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program), the CCT provides cash grants to poor families to

improve their health and nutrition, and help in the schooling of children up to 18 years old.

The program is being carried out by the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) and is partly

funded by foreign loans.

P62-B budget

Last year’s budget for the CCT, the Aquino administration’s flagship antipoverty program was P62.3 billion.

As of Dec. 31, 2015, according to COA, the DSWD had availed itself of seven foreign loans amounting to P90.03

billion to implement five projects, three of which are still ongoing, including the CCT.
In February, the World Bank approved a new $450-million (about P21-billion) loan to the Philippines to augment

funding for the project in the next four years.

In its report, COA cited “recurring deficiencies in the implementation of 4Ps resulting in delayed delivery of

assistance to rightful beneficiaries or unnecessary holding of idle funds” by Landbank and its conduits.

Payments to qualified beneficiaries suffered delays by 12 to 15 months due to delayed processing and release of

checks or absence of partner conduits, among others, it said.

For 2015, only 22.28 percent of the budgeted amount of P562.40 million was released to the beneficiaries, the

agency said.

From 2010 to 2015, some P1.579 billion in the bank accounts of CCT beneficiaries has not been touched, it said.

These accounts pertain to “noncompliant, delisted or unpaid household beneficiaries.”

As of Dec. 31, 2015, the accounts of 3 million beneficiaries with the Landbank reflected a cumulative balance of

P1.252 billion, of which P1.1 million remained outstanding or left “un-withdrawn” from 30 days to 2,190 days.

This showed that “there was no immediate need for assistance,” the COA said.

It said 79,530 accounts had undrawn balances ranging from P2,801 to P102,200. On the other hand, 386,435

accounts with cumulative undrawn balance of P139.008 million have not reflected any withdrawal since these

were opened.

Auditors also cited delays in the submission of liquidation documents by Landbank, resulting in its inability to

assess the status of the P6.391 billion balance.

From 2008 to 2014, the unliquidated balance amounted to P3.322 billion, the COA said.
Under the memorandum agreement between Landbank and the DSWD, liquidation documents should be submitted

within five working days from the last date of scheduled payout, the COA noted.

Likewise, the amount refunded by Landbank of P1.451 billion was not returned to the Bureau of Treasury, it said.

The COA said the information system on the CCT remained inaccurate.

High compliance

“There were validated compliant beneficiaries excluded or suspended from the payroll, beneficiaries paid in 2015

for 2012 cash grants under the retroactive mode of payment without record in the Grievance Redress System, and

327 households with duplicate names under different household IDs,” it said.

The COA, however, also had something positive to say about the CCT, noting that based on the accomplishment

report attached to payroll payments for 2015, the beneficiaries registered an average compliance rate of 95.82

percent.

It recognized how the program helped 333,673 beneficiaries who graduated from high school in April.

Under the CCT, two types of cash grants are given: a health grant of P500 per household every month, or a total of

P6,000 every year, and an education grant of P300 per child every month for ten months, or a total of P3,000 every

year.

The families may continue receiving the grants, provided they meet certain requirements, such as a minimum

attendance of 85 percent in class, or getting their children vaccinated and weighed regularly.

Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/795829/p6-3-b-in-funds-for-4ps-unliquidated-says-coa#ixzz4KTl0NU48

Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook
 The Civil Service Commission (CSC) on Wednesday clarified the scope of the memorandum circular issued by
President Rodrigo Duterte firing the appointed officials of the previous presidents.
During the hearing over the proposed P1.335-billion CSC budget in 2017, Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman asked the
commission whether or not Duterte’s memorandum circular 4 violates the constitutional provision that no officer
and employee of civil service should be removed or suspended except for cause provided by law.
In Duterte’s memorandum circular 4 signed by Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea, Duterte fired all
presidential appointees of former President Benigno Aquino III and other presidents. Duterte had said he was
disappointed at the corruption that persisted during the officials’ term.
ADVERTISEMENT

Exempted from the President’s order are:

 newly-appointed Cabinet Secretaries, Undersecretaries, and Assistant Secretaries in their respective departments,
including presidential advisers and assistants
 other officials in the Executive Department, including state universities and colleges, and government owned or
controlled corporations (GOCCs), appointed by the incumbent President
 career officials as defined by the Civil Service Laws, rules, and regulations
 members of the judiciary
 officials whose offices are created by virtue of the Philippine Constitution such as Constitutional Commissions and
Ombudsman
 those whose appointments are currently being processed or who may be appointed by the President shortly after
the effectivity of the memorandum circular
READ: Duterte kicks out all presidential appointees in government
In a press conference last Sunday, Duterte said he received information that corruption still persists in the
regulatory agencies.
“Consider your positions vacant as of this hour… Until now, in my provincial visits, I still hear that corruption is
being committed,” the president said.
“My mouth is, as they say, lousy. If you are there because of a presidential appointment, I will declare all your
positions, all throughout the country, vacant,” Duterte said.

During the budget hearing, CSC chairperson Alicia Dela Rosa-Bala said officials who may be removed at the
pleasure of the appointing authority are those appointed without security of tenure.
Bala also clarified that appointed non-career service officials may be removed by the President.
Lagman said Duterte’s memorandum circular seems to discriminate against those who were appointed by the
previous presidents.
“This is a class legislation because it only favors those appointed by the incumbent president and discriminates
against those appointed by the previous presidents,” Lagman said.
CSC Office for Legal Affairs director Ariel Ronquillo said the circular seems to divide people who are subject of
legislation into classes, but it does not transgress the constitutional provision on civil servants.
“It may be considered a class legislation, considering it refers only to particular group of presidential appointees
and those who were appointed by the incumbent president,” Ronquillo said.
“If the intention of this memorandum circular is to remove or terminate the services of previous presidential
appointees who do not enjoy security of tenure because they’re holding non-career positions, while it appears to be
a class legislation, I think it will not transgress that constitutional guarantee,” he added.
Ronquillo said presidential appointees who are non-career officials and do not enjoy security of tenure “can be
removed at any time at the pleasure of the appointing authority.”
“The power to appoint also includes the power to remove,” he added.
Lagman said Duterte’s memorandum circular seems to pose a “sword of Damocles” to the heads of previous
presidential appointees because it discriminates against those were appointed by the previous presidents.
“This memorandum circular covers the overwhelming majority of presidential appointees. It appears that they are
under the sword of Damocles. The sword of Damocles has never been unleashed, it is a threat. To the faint-hearted,
it will be a painful experience,” Lagman said.
Ronquillo said the appointed officials without security of tenure already know upon their appointment that they
could be removed any time at the pleasure of the appointing authority.
“My understanding of the sword of Damocles is it’s an ax ready to fall anytime on whomever it may be directed.
This memorandum circular basically enumerates those who will have to go. They are being asked to tender their
courtesy resignation,” Ronquillo said.
“This refer only to those who are non-career, those who are not enjoying security of tenure. So therefore, from the
start of employment, they know they can go anytime the appointing authority tells them to go,” he added.
Lagman maintained that Duterte’s memorandum circular smacks of being Marcosian, because it was similar to the
1972 letter of instruction (LOI) issued by the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos ordering the courtesy resignation of
appointed officials just after declaring martial law.
READ: Lagman likens Duterte to Marcos in firing appointed officials
Ronquillo said Marcos’ letter and Duterte’s memorandum circular are not “squarely similar” because Duterte’s
order provides for specific exemptions and clarifies that career officials are not covered by his order to vacate their
positions.
“I’m not aware about the letter of instruction by the former president. However, if based on information given to us,
the LOI mandates everybody to resign. Somehow, we can say it’s not squarely similar. The memorandum circular
provides for the exemptions, and it clarifies career officials are not covered,” Ronquillo said.
Marcos’ LOI read: “In order to facilitate the reorganization of the Executive Branch of the national government as
directed in Presidential Decree No. 1, dated September 24, 1972, and in order that the Judicial Branch may also be
reorganized so as to meet the necessities of the present national emergency, make the government machinery more
responsive to the needs of the people and effect economy, I hereby direct, pursuant to General Order No. 1, dated
September 22, 1972, as amended, that all officers of the national government whose appointments are vested in the
President of the Philippines submit their resignations from office, thru their Department Heads, not later than
October 15, 1972.”
Marcos exempted from his order the Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, the auditor general
and the chairman and members of the Commission on Elections. RAM

Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/809206/csc-clarifies-dutertes-order-to-fire-ex-presidents-

men#ixzz4KTopElEC
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook
 Ombudsman files charges against former lawmaker over P65M PDAF scam
16 September 2016

Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales has ordered the filing of multiple

charges before the Sandiganbayan against former Misamis Occidental
Representative Marina Clarete for using her Priority Development Assistance Fund
(PDAF) for “ghost” projects. Clarete is facing 18 counts of violation of Section 3(e)
of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act No. 3019), 11 counts of
Malversation thru Falsification of Public Documents and seven counts of
Malversation of Public Funds.

In-depth investigation found that in 2007 to 2009, the Department of Budget

and Management issued seven Special Allotment Release Orders totaling P65
million as part of the lawmaker’s PDAF. Clarete identified and endorsed the
National Agri-business Corporation (NABCOR), National Livelihood Development
Corporation (NLDC) and Technology Resource Center (TRC) as implementing
agencies, with Kabuhayan at Kalusugang Alay sa Masa Foundation, Inc.
(KKAMFI), Kasangga sa Magandang Bukas Foundation, Inc. (KMBFI) and Aaron
Foundation Philippines, Inc. (AFPI) as non-government organization (NGO)
partners.

Clarete claimed that the P65 million was used to fund the distribution of
livelihood technology kits and trainings; water pumps; hand tractors; calamansi,
rambutan and mango seedlings.

On-site field validation, however, revealed that the recipients enumerated in

the list of purported beneficiaries denied having received any of the items. None of
the mayors or municipal agriculturalists in the first district were even aware of the
projects.

To liquidate the funds, respondents submitted fabricated documents consisting

of partial and final physical reports; certificates of acceptance; auditor’s reports;
financial status reports; summaries of training expenses; liquidation reports;
inspections reports; purchase orders; distribution summaries; delivery receipts;
official receipts; sales invoices; and list of beneficiaries and participants.

As defense, Clarete claimed that her signatures in the documents were

forged and that the Commission on Audit (COA) has not issued any Notice of
Disallowance for the fund usage.
 In its Resolution, the Ombudsman stated that “the Office of the Ombudsman
has been granted virtually plenary investigatory powers and that it may, for every
particular investigation, decide how best to pursue each investigation.”

According to Ombudsman Morales, “it may even pursue the investigation

without awaiting the decision of the COA if it determines that such decision is not
indispensable to the investigation and prosecution of the case.”

She added that “based on the evidence presented, the widespread misuse of
the PDAF allocated to Clarete was coursed through a complex scheme basically
involving projects supposedly funded by the PDAF but which turned out to be
inexistent or ghost.”

Also charged as co-accused are former Department of Agriculture Secretary

Arthur Yap, Alan Javellana, Rhodora Mendoza, Encarnita Christina Munsod,
Marilou Antonio, Marilou Ferrer, Julie Villaralvo-Johnson, Romulo Relevo, Allen
Calma, Victor Roman Cacal, Maria Ninez Guañizo, Flerida Alberto, Maria Paz Vega,
Gondolina Amata, Emmanuel Alexis Sevidal, Ofelia Ordoñez, Sofia Cruz, Evelyn
Sucgang, Gregoria Buenaventura, Rodrigo Doria, Godofredo Roque, Chita
Jalandoni, Filipina Rodriguez, Ma. Neriza Gador, Antonio Ortiz, Dennis Cunanan,
Maria Rosalinda Lacsamana, Francisco Figura, Consuelo Lilian Espiritu, Pio
Ronquillo and Marivic Jover.

Under Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, public officials are prohibited from
causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or giving any
private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of
his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident
bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. On the other hand, Malversation is
committed by a public officer who has custody or control of public funds or property
by reason of the duties of office and that he appropriated, took, misappropriated or
consented or, through abandonment or negligence, permitted another person to
take them. ###

http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/index.php?home=1&pressId=OTY0
 Ombudsman fires DOJ prosecutor for grave misconduct
02 August 2016

Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales has ordered the dismissal from

service of Zamboanga City Deputy City Prosecutor Roselyn Murillo-Mamon after
she was found guilty of Grave Misconduct, for actively persuading a police
complainant to drop the charges in frustrated murder case he filed before Mamon’s
office in exchange for P200,000.00.

In a complaint against Mamon, Police Officer III Flavio Enriquez, Jr. narrated
that on 22 July 2013, Mamon called him and offered P250,000.00 to P300,000.00
in exchange for not implicating a certain Dadol Mansul and Police Officer Phon
Mohammad in a Frustrated Murder case pending before Mamon’s office. He also
alleged that Mansul and Mohammad’s legal counsel, Atty. Pherham Saiddi, asked
him how much money he wanted so he would not implicate his clients. PO3
Enriquez reported the matter to his superiors. On 16 August 2013, Mamon and
Saiddi were caught in an entrapment operation conducted by the National Bureau
of Investigation immediately after they handed the P200,000.00 marked money to
PO3 Enriquez.

In the event that the dismissal could no longer be enforced, the penalty shall
be converted into a fine equivalent to her one year salary.

Aside from the dismissal, Mamon is also facing a criminal case before the
Sandiganbayan for violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
Act (Republic Act No. 3019). ###

http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/index.php?home=1&pressId=OTI3http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/index.php?home=1&p
ressId=OTI3
 Ombudsman sues former DOH Secretary for bid anomaly in P392M hospital
project
11 July 2016

Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales has found probable cause to charge

former Department of Health (DOH) Secretary Enrique Ona and two other officials
for the anomalous procurement of its hospital modernization program in
2012. Ona together with Undersecretary Teodoro Herbosa and Assistant
Secretary Nicolas Lutero III are set to face trial before the Sandiganbayan for
violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act
No. 3019).

In addition to the criminal charges, the Ombudsman also found Ona, et.al.
guilty of Grave Misconduct. They were ordered dismissed from the service and
meted the accessory penalties of perpetual disqualification from holding public
office with forfeiture of retirement benefits. In case of separation from the service,
the penalty is convertible to a fine equivalent to respondents’ one year salary.

Investigation found that in September 2012, the DOH implemented its

modernization program for the Region 1 Medical Center (R1MC) with a project cost
of P392.2million. Five bidders joined the public bidding for the project with two
bidders, EM Cuerpo Inc. and Specified Contractors & Development Inc. (SCDI),
declared as post-disqualified for failure to comply with the agency’s detailed
estimate requirements. Aggrieved, SCDI, the second lowest bidder, filed a motion
for reconsideration that was eventually denied by the Special Bids and Awards
Committee (SBAC). On 23 August 2013, a Notice of Award was issued to the 3rd
lowest bidder, Northern Builders Inc. (NBI). No protest as provided under the
Government Procurement Reform Act (Republic Act No. 9184) was filed by SCDI.

In August 2013, SCDI filed a letter-complaint with the Office of the President
alleging anomalies in the procurement project. Ona then requested Lutero to
conduct a fact-finding investigation on the matter.

On 13 September 2013, Ona instructed the chief of R1MC, Dr. Joseph

Rolando Mejia, to provide an update on the procurement project. Three days later,
on 16 September 2013, Herbosa sent a letter to Mejia “enjoining him to nullify or
set aside the issuance of the Notice of Award to [NBI] and to continue with the
post-qualification of SCDI.” On 30 September 2013, Ona issued a Cease and
Desist Order to Mejia pending investigation of the SCDI complaint. In December
2013, the DOH conducted a re-bid for the project.
 In its Resolution, the Ombudsman stated that when SCDI did not file any
protest or appeal, “the SBAC’s resolution had become final and respondents could
no longer intervene and issue a Cease and Desist Order.”

According to Ombudsman Morales, “while Ona had the power to

investigate any infractions or violations committed by its employees including the
members of the SBAC, this does not mean that he could simply invalidate and
declare null and void the proceedings and decisions made by the SBAC without
observing the provisions of R.A. No. 9184.”

“This Office is convinced that Ona, Lutero and Herbosa conspired with one
another in giving unwarranted benefit, advantage or preference to SCDI,” added
Ombudsman Morales. ###

http://www.gov.ph/1987/07/25/executive-order-no-292-book-vtitle-isubtitle-achapter-5-personnel-policies-and-
standards/