P424.1-B lump-sum funds inserted in 2015 budget, SC told
ANOTHER petition has been filed with the Supreme Court which seeks to stop the implementation of specific provisions of the 2015 General Appropriations Act (GAA) where P424.1-billion worth of “scandalous and unconscionable freight of lump sum” is hidden.
In a 28-page petition, the Philippine Constitution Association (Philconsa), led by its officers, former budget secretary Benjamin Diokno, former Senator Francisco Tatad and Representative Ferdinand Martin Romualdez, said the said amounts are embedded in nine strategic departments and two agencies “of the Executive Department which are highly vulnerable to the whirling of transactional, rent-seeking and patronage politics.”
The lump-sum appropriations totaling P424,144,763,000 are embedded in the following agencies:
-Department of Social Welfare and Development: P102,663,410,000
-Department of Education: P80,779,932,000
-Department of Health: P75,434,919,000
-Department of Public Works and Highways: P47,756,261,000
-Department of National Defense: P36,489,851,000
-Department of Agriculture: P29,918,040,000
-Department of Interior and Local Government: P13,701,274,000
-National Irrigation Administration: P13,016,735,000
-Department of Transportation and Communication: P11,488,011,000
-Philippine National Police: P6,725,598,000
-Department of Environment and Natural Resources: P6,170,732,000
For each of the 11 lump-sum appropriations are 11 separate and distinct special budgets submitted by heads of agencies to the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) and approved by the President.
“Congress only provided the lump-sum appropriations as the ‘faucets’ to open or the ‘wellsprings’ to tap/siphon to fund the Special Budgets prepared by heads of agencies and approved by the President,” petitioners said.
“The special budgets constitute undue delegation of the legislative power of appropriations made by law,” petitioners said adding that the special budgets are the lump sum appropriations prohibited by the Supreme Court in its decision declaring as illegal the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF).
Petitioners also urged the high court to strike down the definition of “savings” under the GAA of 2015 because it gave heads of agencies the authority to determine what constitutes “savings” and given the discretion to discontinue, abandon or commence any programs and projects (PAP) contrary to the 1987 Constitution.
Section 25 (5) of the 1987 Constitution states that “No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President and the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the Heads of the Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.”
Philconsa also sought the nullification of section 73 of GAA 2015 which provides for “realignment of allotment classes and reprioritization of items,” stressing that these are words not present in the Constitution” and are merely “designed to camouflage/veil the prohibition of transfer of funds and to dilute the strict rules on augmentation specified in the Constitution, hence, such executive actions are likewise unconstitutional.”
Philconsa stressed that apart from violating the Constitution, the assailed provisions also run counter to the rulings of the high court against the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) and Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).
Petitioners also called on the high court to issue a restraining order to stop the implementation of the questioned provision of the GAA and to require Congress and the budget department to explain why they should not be cited in contempt for “flagrant disobedience, resistance and disregard” of the PDAF and DAP decisions.
Named as respondents in the petition are Budget Secretary Butch Abad, Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa, the Senate and House of Representatives and the COA.
A similar petition was filed last September 1 by a group of concerned citizens and taxpayers led by former National Treasurer Leonor Briones. Tetch Torres-Tupas
