MANILA, Philippines – Ombudsman Samuel Martires clarified on Wednesday, September 13, that it was annual audit reports that he opposed making public, not the audit observation memorandum that he earlier mentioned.

“In the recent budget hearing of the Office of the Ombudsman before the Committee on House Appropriations of the House of Representatives, the Ombudsman mentioned that the Audit Observation Memorandum should not be published when what he meant was the Annual Audit Report (AAR). The Ombudsman wishes to clarify this matter,” Martires stated in a press release Wednesday.

Martires explained that his intent in restricting access to the AARs was not to shield erring government officials but to ensure that only the final audit report is made public.

“The Ombudsman assures that it is not protecting erring and corrupt government officials and employees, firmly believing that only the Final Audit Report should be published and shared with the public since the AAR could still be subject to appeal before the Commission on Audit En Banc and the Court,” he emphasized.

Must Read

Why the Ombudsman doesn’t want government audits made public

Martires initially said he wanted to remove the budget allocated for the publication of AOMs from the General Appropriations Act on Monday, September 11.

So, what distinguishes an AOM from an AAR?

The AOM identifies specific accounting, documentary, or implementation deficiencies in particular projects or programs within government agencies.

The AAR consists of comprehensive annual audits published on the COA website and frequently serves as the basis for news reports.

However, most AOMs are not published as separate documents to begin with, as their findings are typically included in the AAR, along with explanations from government agencies.

Should the explanations provided by government agencies be deemed reasonable, the COA can recommend corrective actions for these deficiencies.

Other options for COA are issue notices of disallowance, suspension, or charges.

Martires’ clarification, however, raises concerns, as the AARs are among the documentary sources used by the media and civil society to promote transparency in government processes.

House Deputy Minority Leader France Castro of ACT Teachers remarked that Martires’ clarification regarding the AARs was even more troubling than his initial statement.

“The AARs are normally used by media, non-government organizations, and other corruption watchdogs to determine whether government agencies and officials are using taxpayers’ money judiciously and not enriching themselves,” Castro noted.

This is not the first instance where Martires, responsible for prosecuting corruption in government, has advocated for reduced transparency in his preferred policies.

In 2021, he stirred a similar controversy when he announced restrictions on public access to the Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth of public officials. At the time, journalists questioned Martires, citing concerns about the policy’s implications for freedom of information. – Rappler.com