Solons claim OVP’s confidential fund an augmentation, ‘unconstitutional’
MANILA, Philippines — At least two lawmakers asserted on Tuesday that the Office of the Vice President’s (OVP) request for confidential funds (CF) in 2022, which was eventually granted, is indicative of a fund augmentation and, therefore, may be unconstitutional.
At House plenary debates on the Office of the President (OP) proposed budget on Tuesday, Albay 1st District Rep. Edcel Lagman said that based on the OVP letter to the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) — copies of which were sent to him in the middle of discussions — such a request is flawed.
OP was being questioned about the OVP’s P125 million CF in 2022 because the request, which was filed through the DBM, was eventually approved by the OP.
According to Lagman, there is a question as to whether OVP could ask for augmentation, as the original 2022 budget of the agency crafted under former vice president Leni Robredo did not provide funds for confidential purposes.
“This letter addressed to this Secretary of the [DBM] is a request for augmentation of certain items in the Office of the Vice President, and it also refers to confidential funds. The question is, was there a proper augmentation and the second question is, can confidential funds in the OVP be augmented when the 2022 GAA (General Appropriations Act) appropriated or allotted zero for this particular item of expenditure,” Lagman said.
“One, the Constitution prohibits the transfer of funds except with respect to constitutional officers like the President relative to savings for augmentation. The Constitution prohibits the transfer of funds except with respect to the constitutional officers like the President relative to savings for augmentation of allocation which are deficient in his office, not in any other office,” he added.
Lagman gave other reasons why transferring the CF to OVP in 2022 might be illegal under the 1987 Constitution:
- Transfer of funds from one office to another is unconstitutional,
- The constitution dictates that augmentation must come from savings, and
- The transfer was meant to augment deficiencies in expenditures, but there is nothing to be augmented in OVP’s budget.
ACT Teachers party-list Rep. France Castro also gave the same observations even as OP budget sponsor and ACT-CIS party-list Rep. Erwin Tulfo insisted that OVP’s CF are not fund augmentations in nature.
Casto’s line of questioning stems from DBM and Marikina 2nd District Rep. Stella Quimbo’s explanation that the CF was placed in the OVP’s 2022 budget line item. DBM and Quimbo gave this explanation after Castro and the rest of the Makabayan bloc called out the OVP for seeking the CF.
DBM and Quimbo’s explanations clarified that OVP’s CF came from the contingent fund and not from OP.
READ: DBM says OVP’s 2022 confidential funds technically not a fund transfer — Co
“Mr. Speaker, I will repeat it, there is no augmentation, and the funds did not come from OP; it was from the DBM […] Actually, it is not savings, as stated in the letter we are basing these from, we insist that it was not an augmentation or transfer of funds from the Office of the President, Mr. Speaker,” Tulfo said.
“Okay, so if this is not an augmentation, what is this? What should we call this, the release of funds from the Good Governance Engagement and Social Service Engagement?” Castro asked.
“These are appropriations from the contingent fund, Mr. Speaker,” Tulfo replied.
Castro reiterated that such a transfer of appropriation is unconstitutional, as only existing items can be augmented, and transfers should be within an agency, not inter-agency.
“Mr. Speaker, this is a prohibited transfer of appropriation from one item to another. The Constitution states no law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations. However, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of constitutional commissions may and by law be authorized to augment any item in the General Appropriation Law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations,” Castro said.
“Mr. Speaker, under the Constitution, you can only add to existing items like what was stated in the OVP, using savings only and not this existing item inside the budget or the GAA. Not the contingent fund. Mr. Speaker, I will reiterate: under the Constitution, only savings can be used for augmentation of an existing item,” she added.
While Tulfo maintains that the OVP’s CF was not for augmentation, several of the OVP’s other requests to DBM were for augmentation of certain items in its budget.
According to the OVP letter-request to DBM — which Lagman obtained and was later shared with the media — it was revealed that OVP asked for a total of P403.4 million for the following purposes:
- P144.7 million for augmentation of financial assistance/ subsidy
- P8.74 million for augmentation of special duty allowance for the Vice Presidential Security and Protection Group
- P107.4 million for 192 additional coterminous and contractual positions
- P250 million worth of confidential funds
Discussions about CIFs have been plenty during the proposed 2024 budget deliberations after Castro and the rest of the Makabayan bloc accused the OVP of illegally acquiring CFs in 2022, as the original budget crafted under former vice president Leni Robredo did not have this item.
At one point, Castro even dangled the possibility of filing impeachment raps against Vice President Sara Duterte over the said issue.
READ: Lawmaker threatens VP Sara with impeach rap; Veep responds, ‘Enjoy’
