CoA faces scrutiny over 10-year document rule



How a two-star Michelin mindset turns everyday home cooking into an immersive, multi-sensory culinary journey.

Inspired by the world’s ultimate comfort foods, World Kitchens is a one-of-a-kind dining destination in Araneta City,…

Authorities are probing an illegal recruitment scheme within the Bureau of Fire Protection (BFP) after arresting an…

The combined death toll from the southwest monsoon and recent tropical cyclones has risen to 31, disaster officials…

Authorities have identified enforcement of the Maritime Labor Convention (MLC) through the Magna Carta of Filipino…
A lawmaker on Wednesday pressed the Commission on Audit (CoA) to harmonize its document retention policy with the statute of limitations for corruption cases, warning that current rules could allow crimes involving public funds to go unpunished.
The issue arose during budget deliberations at the House of Representatives as the CoA sought a proposed budget of P15.24 billion for 2026.
4Ps Partylist Representative JC Abalos noted that under current CoA rules, documents not subject to any inquiry or investigation are disposed of after 10 years. However, prescriptive periods for crimes like graft, direct bribery and malversation can range from 15 to 20 years.
“As we could see, there is a clear and legal practical gap between the retention and prescriptive periods,” Abalos said, citing recent investigations into flood control projects that may date back a decade or more.
Abalos asked if CoA was considering amending its rules or recommending legislation to reconcile its retention period with the longest applicable prescriptive periods for crimes.
CoA sponsor and Davao del Sur Representative John Tracy Cagas responded that documents currently under inquiry or litigation are retained indefinitely. For others, however, the 10-year period applies.
Speaking on behalf of the agency, Cagas stated that CoA is “amenable to extend the preservation” of documents beyond the 10-year period, but emphasized that any amendment would entail “additional cost or expense” for the agency.
Abalos countered that the expense is negligible compared to the benefit of ensuring accountability.
“That cost is very small compared to the benefits that our countrymen will feel, given how pressing the issues that plague our nation,” Abalos said.