Palace on SC modified ruling on DAP: Presumption of good faith preserved
MANILA, Philippines—Although authors of the now defunct Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) are still not off the hook, Malacañang on Tuesday noted positive changes in the Supreme Court ruling against it.
“We note that based on the limited information provided by (SC spokesperson) Atty. Ted Te, the SC has upheld the doctrine of operative fact which declared all acts are valid until they are declared unconstitutional,” presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda said in a statement.
“Moreover, the presumption of good faith has been preserved and emphasized, which clarified the previous impression that the authors are presumed to be in bad faith,” he added.
Te, on Tuesday, announced that the high court upheld its July 2014 ruling declaring DAP partly unconstitutional. However, it made modifications in its decision.
The SC said authors would still be held accountable, unless it was found that they acted in good faith. Excluded from liability were the proponents and implementors of the DAP before last year’s initial ruling.
The following acts remain unconstitutional:
Article continues after this advertisement1. The withdrawal of unobligated allotments from the implementing agencies, and the declaration of the withdrawn unobligated allotments and unreleased appropriations as savings prior to the end of the fiscal year and without complying with the statutory definition of savings contained in the General Appropriations Act.
Article continues after this advertisement2. The cross-border transfers of the savings of the executive to augment the appropriations of other offices outside the executive.
3. The use of unprogrammed funds despite the absence of a certification by the national treasurer that the revenue collections exceeded the revenue targets for noncompliance with the conditions provided in the relevant General Appropriations Acts.
However, removed from the list was the act of “funding of projects, activities and programs that were not covered by any appropriation in the General Appropriations Act.”
Since the DAP was declared unconstitutional, the executive has been insisting that it acted only on good faith and with due diligence.
Communications Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. at that time said that those questioning the administration’s “good faith” should be the ones to prove otherwise.
RELATED STORIES
SC modifies ruling against DAP, partly grants gov’t MR
