PhilHealth office. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
Former Bayan Muna representative Neri Colmenares, one of the petitioners against the transfer of billions of pesos from the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth) to the National Treasury, corrected reports that the Supreme Court’s order to stop the transfer applied to only P29.9 billion of the state insurer’s so-called excess funds.
He said the court’s Oct. 29 temporary restraining order (TRO) specifically pertained to the P59.9 billion that was left of the original amount of P89.9 billion, which the Department of Finance (DOF) had ordered to be transferred to the National Treasury to be used for unprogrammed appropriations this year.
Of the P89.9 billion, P20 billion was transferred on May 10, followed by P10 billion on Aug. 21. The third tranche of P30 billion was already transferred on Oct. 16, while the supposed fourth and last tranche of P29.9 billion was to be transferred this month.
READ: PhilHealth vows to abide by TRO vs transfer of excess funds
“If the Php 30 B has been transferred to the National Treasury, we demand that DOF should return these to PhilHealth to be faithful to the TRO decision,” he said.
‘Assailed section’
He cited the Supreme Court TRO ruling which enjoined “the respondents from transferring the remaining balance of PHP 59.9 Billion of PhilHealth Fund Balance scheduled for transfer to the Unprogrammed Appropriations and from further implementing the assailed Section 1(d), Chapter XLIII of the General Appropriations Act of 2024 and Department of Finance Circular No. 003-2024.”
The “assailed section” the high court was referring to was the provision in the 2024 national budget that the DOF cited as grounds for the transfer of the PhilHealth funds.
One group of petitioners who sought the TRO included former Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Carpio and former Finance Undersecretary Cielo Magno said the transfer of PhilHealth funds constituted “technical malversation” because it was to be used for purposes other than what it was appropriated for.
The group cited a Supreme Court ruling in 2006 on when technical malversation happens and that Finance Secretary Ralph Recto had diverted PhilHealth funds to some public use “other than that intended by law.”
“There shall be no reallocation of PhilHealth funds unless abandoned or their purpose has been accomplished,” it said.
Special law
Carpio told reporters when his group filed their petition on Oct. 16 that PhilHealth funds were raised through a special law, specifically the excise tax from the sin tax law, which stated that a certain percentage of excise taxes shall be allocated to fund PhilHealth’s objectives.
Since these are special funds raised for a specific purpose, the Constitution prohibits their use for any other purpose, he said.
In a brief response to the allegations, Recto said: “We only followed instructions by Congress in the GAA (General Appropriations Act) 2024. Will respect [the] Supreme Court decision.”
The Department of Health earlier said that a portion of the PhilHealth funds that had already been transferred was used to finance the Health Emergency Allowance for health workers during the pandemic.
READ: PhilHealth’s fault