Beta

Flashcards Studio

Practice bar questions and get clear AI feedback on every answer.

Study Settings View Stats

Topic

Question Type

Essay Multiple Choice

Question Source

All Jurisprudence based

0 tracked cards Remedial Law, Legal and Judicial Ethics, with Practical Exercises

An officer of the Office of the President's Economic Policy Group sits as a member of the Bids and Awards Committee for a national procurement of a cloud-based enterprise resource planning system to be awarded by the Office of the President. He personally owns 55% of CloudNexus Corp., a private firm that submitted a bid for the project. He participates in the BAC’s evaluation and in the final awarding decision to CloudNexus and does not disclose his ownership. (a) Does the officer’s conduct constitute a prohibited financial or pecuniary interest under RA 6713 Sec. 7(b)(2)? (b) Which rule(s) govern this situation, and what is the controlling standard for determining conflict of interest? (c) What are the appropriate consequences and remedies for him and for the appointing authority?

Choose the Best Answer

Yes; The conflict is triggered by any private ownership detected in a bidding firm, but the controlling standard is focused on perception of conflict rather than actual pecuniary interest; This confuses apparent conflict with the statutory standard, making it incorrect. Yes; it constitutes a prohibited financial or pecuniary interest under RA 6713 Sec. 7(b)(2); Office of the President Memorandum Circular No. 17, s. 1986 requires disclosure and recusal; Rule XVIII, Sec. 12 of the Revised Civil Service Rules mandates disqualification from BAC participation; Consequences include voiding the BAC decision, possible administrative sanctions against the official, and reconstitution of the BAC by the appointing authority. No; RA 6713 Sec. 7(b)(2) applies only to elected officials, not Presidential appointees; The involvement in procurement does not constitute a conflict of interest if the official does not sit as BAC chair; This is incorrect under the law’s broad scope. Yes; The act may lead to immediate suspension, mandatory disposition of shares, and voiding of the contract with a new procurement; This overreaches and is not the standard remedy, making it incorrect.

Load another random question

Your Progress

No data Retention

Tracked Cards: 0
Accuracy: No data
Retained: 0

View Detailed Analytics

Difficulty Breakdown

Answer flashcards to build a real score-based difficulty breakdown.

Current Streak 0 Days

Start a streak with this card.

Suggested Decks

View All

Leech Cards

Review

No recent weak flashcards in your saved workbook.

More

Flashcards Studio

Question

Choose the Best Answer

Hello