Malacañang on SC ruling vs DAP: We respect rule of law
Malacañang photos
Malacañang on Wednesday rejected accusations that it was not following the rule of law after no less than President Benigno Aquino heavily criticized the Supreme Court decision against his Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) and insisted that he was “right.”
Communications Secretary Herminio Coloma said the Palace was “respecting the rule of law by seeking a reconsideration of the decision.”
The executive branch has until July 19 to file a motion for reconsideration.
“The Rules of Court allow filing of a motion for reconsideration. We are complying with the rules,” Coloma told reporters in a text message.
Two weeks after the high court declared the DAP unconstitutional, Aquino went all-out against the magistrates in a move reminiscent of his campaign to oust then Chief Justice Renato Corona in 2011 and 2012.
Article continues after this advertisementAlso in 2011, he defied the high court’s decision allowing former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to seek medical treatment abroad for fear that she might escape.
Article continues after this advertisementOn Monday, Aquino served notice to the justices that he was not accepting their latest ruling, warning of a possible “collision” with the executive branch.
He claimed he did not want to reach that point when the legislature, apparently controlled by his administration, would have to “intervene” between the two other coequal branches.
The following day, he focused his speech at the Daylight Dialogue in Malacañang on the ruling, insisting that he was “right” and that the court, voting 13-0 against the DAP, was wrong.
“I find it difficult to accept their decision when I know that we are right, and, more importantly, that doing nothing means depriving so many Filipinos of opportunities to grow and prosper,” he told his audience that included visiting World Bank president Jim Yong Kim.
In his televised address on Monday, Aquino dropped hints that he had the goods on the magistrates.
“There was something that you did in the past, which you tried to do again, and there are those who are saying that this is worse,” he claimed without elaborating.
The Commission on Audit earlier questioned the Supreme Court’s decision to set aside P3.2 billion of its funds as savings even if it still had obligations in 2012.
RELATED STORIES
SC declares parts of DAP unconstitutional
