The Commission on Audit (COA) is the sole constitutional body vested with the exclusive power to examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to government revenues, receipts, expenditures, and uses of funds and property. In exercising this mandate, the COA necessarily performs quasi-judicial functions, particularly when it disallows transactions, issues charges for lost assets, or denies claims against the government. Decisions rendered in these audit-related controversies are appealable through a defined hierarchical process that culminates, when necessary, in the Supreme Court.

This article comprehensively discusses the entire appeal regime within and from the Commission on Audit under Philippine law as of December 2025.

Constitutional and Statutory Foundations

1987 Constitution, Article IX-D, Section 2(1) – exclusive authority to promulgate auditing rules and decide any case involving expenditures of public funds.
1987 Constitution, Article IX-D, Section 2(2) – power to define the scope of its audit and examination and to promulgate rules of procedure.
Presidential Decree No. 1445 (Government Auditing Code of the Philippines), particularly Sections 35 (disallowances), 41 (charges), 48–52 (appeals and settlement).
Commission on Audit Resolution No. 2009-006 dated 15 September 2009 – 2009 Revised Rules of Procedure of the Commission on Audit (RRPCOA), as amended by subsequent resolutions (notably Resolutions 2013-008, 2016-009, 2020-012 on electronic filing, and 2022-006 on certain procedural relaxations).
COA Circular No. 2009-005 (responsibility for shortages/losses), Circular No. 2012-001 (revised guidelines on suspension, disallowance, and charge), Circular No. 2016-006 (guidelines on automatic appeal/review), and Office Orders creating the present cluster structure.

Types of Decisions Subject to Appeal

The following COA issuances are appealable:

Notice of Disallowance (ND) – transaction illegal, irregular, excessive, extravagant, unconscionable, or unnecessary (IIEEU).
Notice of Charge (NC) – for loss, misuse, or shortage of government funds or property.
Notice of Suspension (NS) – technically, suspension is interlocutory, but when the auditor issues a Decision maintaining the suspension that effectively becomes a disallowance, it is appealable. An NS that is not acted upon within 90 days is deemed lifted.
Decision denying relief from money or property accountability.
Decision on requests for condonation or write-off of accountability.
Decision denying a money claim against the government (original jurisdiction of the Commission Proper).

Persons Who May Appeal / Persons Liable

Any party determined to be liable in the ND/NC (payee/recipient, certifying officer, approving/authorizing officer, or persons who participated in the transaction) may appeal. The head of agency is always notified and may appeal even if not named liable.

Liability is solidary, but the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled (from Arias v. Sandiganbayan, 1989, up to the 2023 rulings in Torreta v. COA and Technical Education and Skills Development Authority v. COA) that:

Recipients/payees are always civilly liable to return the amount (passive liability).
Approving and certifying officers may be excused if they acted in good faith and the violation was not patent or gross.

Hierarchical Appeal Structure

Level 1: The Auditor (Audit Team Leader / Supervising Auditor)

Issues the ND/NS/NC after exit conference and receipt of agency comments.

Level 2: The Director

National Government Sector (NGS) Cluster Director
Corporate Government Sector (CGS) Cluster Director
Local Government Sector (LGS) Cluster Director
For LGUs, the COA Regional Director initially exercises appellate jurisdiction before elevation to the LGS Cluster Director.

Level 3: Commission on Audit Proper (Commission Proper or CP)

The Chairman and two Commissioners, sitting en banc or in division (usually in division for disallowance appeals, en banc for policy matters or when a division reverses itself).

Detailed Appeal Procedure

A. Appeal from Auditor to Director (Rule V, RRPCOA)

Reglementary period: Six (6) months from receipt of the ND/NS/NC/Decision.

Form and contents of appeal:

Written Appeal Memorandum (no prescribed form, but must be verified if filed by counsel).
State material dates showing timeliness.
Clearly state grounds relied upon (e.g., transaction is legal and regular, good faith, violation of due process, prescription, etc.).
Attach certified true copies of ND/NC, pertinent contracts, vouchers, and proof of receipt dates.
Proof of service upon adverse parties (other persons liable and the agency head).

Where to file:

Preferably filed directly with the Cluster Director or Regional Director having supervision over the auditor.
May be filed with the Auditor, who is required to forward the entire records within 10 days.

Effect of appeal: The filing of the appeal automatically stays the execution/collection of the disallowance (COA Circular 2012-001; confirmed in numerous CP decisions).

The Director renders a Decision (affirm, reverse, or modify). Copies are furnished to all parties and the Auditor.

B. Petition for Review from Director to Commission Proper (Rule VI, RRPCOA)

Reglementary period:

Within the time remaining of the original six-month period reckoned from receipt of the Auditor’s decision.
In no case shall the remaining period be less than thirty (30) days from receipt of the Director’s Decision.

Example:

Appellant received ND on 1 January 2025.
Received Director’s Decision affirming ND on 1 October 2025.
Remaining period = 6 months minus time already consumed appealing to Director → if appeal to Director was filed on day 10, remaining period is approximately 5 months 20 days, but never less than 30 days.

Form and contents:

Verified Petition for Review.
Seven (7) legible copies plus copies for each adverse party.
Clearly state material dates.
Contain specific assignment of errors, arguments, and prayer.
Attach certified true copies of the Auditor’s decision, Director’s Decision, and material portions of the record.

Where to file:

Office of the Commission Secretary, COA Central Office, Quezon City, or electronically via the COA e-Filing Portal (mandatory for counseled parties since 2022 per COA Resolution 2022-006).

No filing fee is required.

Effect of filing: Automatic stay of execution continues.

The Commission Proper may:

Give due course and decide on the merits, or
Dismiss outright for lack of merit, untimeliness, or procedural defects.

C. Motion for Reconsideration before the Commission Proper (Rule VIII)

Period: Thirty (30) days from receipt of the CP Decision or Resolution.

Only one (1) motion for reconsideration is allowed.

Second MR or further pleadings are prohibited and not acted upon.

The CP resolves the MR through a Resolution (usually penned by the ponente).

D. Appeal to the Supreme Court (Rule 64 in relation to Rule 65, Rules of Court)

Mode: Petition for Certiorari (not ordinary appeal).

Ground: Grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.

Period: Sixty (60) days from notice of the CP Decision/Resolution denying MR (extended by the 2020 Bar Matter on Fresh Period Rule; 60 days is now the standard after Torreta v. COA, G.R. No. 242925, 10 November 2020).

The Supreme Court does not act as a trier of facts. It respects COA findings if supported by substantial evidence, but will review questions of law (e.g., whether a particular expenditure is “unnecessary” or “extravagant,” or whether good faith exempts an officer from solidary liability).

Automatic Review by Commission Proper

Per COA Memorandum No. 2016-026 and subsequent office orders:

Director’s Decisions involving any of the following are automatically elevated to the CP for review even without petition:

Amount of disallowance/charge ≥ ₱50 million (NGS/CGS) or ₱30 million (LGS)
Cases of national significance or involving novel questions of law/policy
Cases involving constitutional officers or heads of GOCCs/GFIs

The Director’s Decision does not become final until the CP has acted or the period for automatic review has lapsed.

Execution Pending Appeal / Settlement of Disallowances

Execution is automatically stayed during the pendency of a timely appeal.

If the decision becomes final and executory (issuance of Notice of Finality of Decision or NFD), the COA issues a Certificate of Finality and directs the agency to withhold from salaries or benefits, or file collection case if the liable person is already separated.

Amounts already paid under compulsion or protest are refunded or credited if the disallowance is ultimately reversed or modified.

Electronic Filing and Service

Since 2020 (COA Resolution 2020-012, made permanent in 2022), filing and service by electronic means (e-Filing Portal or email to official COA addresses) is allowed and, for lawyers, mandatory. Physical filing is still accepted.

Prescription / Finality

There is no prescription for the COA to issue ND/NC (Silang v. COA, G.R. No. 213189, 08 September 2020).

Once a decision becomes final and executory, it can no longer be reopened except on grounds of newly discovered evidence, fraud, or mistake (very rarely granted).

Conclusion

The COA appeal process is deliberately hierarchical and technical to ensure both fiscal discipline and procedural fairness. Public officers and employees who receive a Notice of Disallowance or Charge must act with utmost urgency within the six-month period, because failure to file a timely appeal renders the disallowance final and executory, with all its severe consequences on salary, retirement benefits, and even future government employment.

Mastery of the 2009 Revised Rules of Procedure, as supplemented by the latest COA circulars and Supreme Court jurisprudence on good faith and solidary liability, remains indispensable for any lawyer or public officer handling COA disallowance appeals.