Alan Cayetano: Palace must clarify with SC what ‘savings’ mean | Inquirer News
Close  

Alan Cayetano: Palace must clarify with SC what ‘savings’ mean

By: - Deputy Day Desk Chief / @TJBurgonioINQ
/ 09:17 AM August 02, 2014

Senate Majority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano. INQUIRER.net FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines—Malacañang should clarify with the Supreme Court what it meant by savings to save Congress from contravening its ruling, Senate Majority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano said on Friday.

Cayetano urged the executive department to file an urgent motion for the Supreme Court to clarify the “parameters” of savings in its ruling partly voiding the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).

ADVERTISEMENT

“If I were President and I control both chambers, I would include in the MR (motion for reconsideration) that the Supreme Court clarify the definition of savings. Let the Supreme Court do it,” he told reporters in a briefing.

In his State of the Nation Address, President Benigno Aquino III asked Congress to pass a supplemental budget to finance projects that otherwise would be suspended because of the Supreme Court ruling on the DAP.

FEATURED STORIES

Mr. Aquino also asked both chambers to pass a resolution clarifying the definition of savings in view of the high court decision.

Both Senate President Franklin Drilon and House Speaker Feliciano Belmonte agreed with Malacañang that Congress has the power to define savings.

The Supreme Court justices struck down the executive branch’s practices of declaring savings from unreleased appropriations and using standby or unprogrammed funds.

They ruled that savings and standby appropriations could be declared only at the end of the fiscal year.

Cayetano also cautioned his colleagues against defining savings that would contravene the high court landmark ruling.

“My caveat is that the patience of the people is running thin… So if we either circumvent the law or if we appear to circumvent the Supreme Court decision, we’ll be where we were when we started with DAP and PDAF (Priority Development Assistance Fund). You cannot regain the trust of the people by abusing their trust, and any circumvention of the Supreme Court decision will be looked at by people as abuse of their trust,” he said.

The senator, who received an allocation of P50 million for his pet projects in 2011 under DAP, said the definition has to be “well crafted” so Congress would not be perceived as circumventing the Supreme Court decision.

ADVERTISEMENT

“If we define it in accordance with the Supreme Court ruling, it will protect us against a plunderous president. But if we circumvent the law, not only is it promoting a plunderous president even in this administration, it will be promoting secretaries to have less accountability,” he added.

Any circumvention would prompt the filing of suit against Congress, the senator said.

There would have been no need to define savings, but apparently the “fear factor” has set in among Cabinet officials on the generation and use of savings following the Supreme Court ruling, he said.

Before the DAP controversy, the P10-billion pork barrel scandal allegedly orchestrated by businesswoman Janet Lim-Napoles riveted the country.

Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Ramon Revilla Jr., along with Napoles and several others, are facing trial for plunder and graft over the pork scam.

Cayetano, however, acknowledged that Congress define savings, “but only when it is not already defined in the Constitution or in the Supreme Court decision.”

RELATED STORIES

Cayetano backs live coverage of pork scam hearings

Cayetano warns Binay will save senators indicted for pork scam

The pork barrel scam

Read Next
Don't miss out on the latest news and information.

Subscribe to INQUIRER PLUS to get access to The Philippine Daily Inquirer & other 70+ titles, share up to 5 gadgets, listen to the news, download as early as 4am & share articles on social media. Call 896 6000.

TAGS: Alan Peter Cayetano, DAP, Disbursement Acceleration Program, Feliciano Belmonte, Franklin Drilon, Pork barrel scandal, Supreme Court
For feedback, complaints, or inquiries, contact us.

News that matters

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and
acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.



© Copyright 1997-2021 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.