Castro: Presidents can鈥檛 just alter appropriations in enacted budget
MANILA, Philippines — Presidents cannot simply change line-item appropriations in an enacted budget, ACT Teachers party-list Rep. France Castro said on Tuesday, following President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s order for a department to fund the country’s integrated emergency call system.
In a message to reporters, Castro said that Marcos must explain how he intends to fund the program lodged under the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), given that Congress has already passed the 2025 General Appropriations Act (GAA), which the President has signed into law.
Interior Secretary Jonvic Remulla said at the Palace briefing on Tuesday that Marcos had ordered the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) to restore the removed funds for DILG’s information technology (IT) program.
READ: Marcos orders DILG to shift funds to integrated 911 system
“As a rule, the President cannot simply change the budget enacted by Congress. He should explain how he intends to implement his own adjustments to the budget,” Castro said in Filipino.
“Will he declare savings at the beginning of the year?” she asked.
Remulla said the P500 million intelligence funds lodged with agencies under the DILG will be removed and allocated to the IT budget, including the launch and bidding process of the country’s integrated 911 system.
“As instructed by the President, our budget secretary will revert the IT budget and remove the additional P500 million intelligence funds,” he said partly in Filipino.
“The 911 system is language-sensitive throughout the Philippines. So, if you’re in Ilocos, an Ilocano speaker will answer you,” he also said.
When asked whether this move would be legal since the budget has been enacted already, Remulla mentioned portions of Marcos’ veto message in the GAA. Under Section 6 of Marcos’ veto message, higher allocations in the new budgetary items introduced by Congress will be subject to the national government’s cash programming and require approval from the President.
In November 2013, the Supreme Court (SC) declared the pork barrel or the Priority Development Assistance Fund — a discretionary fund given to lawmakers for their pet projects — as unconstitutional. Before the SC decision, lawmakers from the House and Senate were allowed to intervene, assume, or participate in the post-enactment stages of the budget execution.
READ: SC declares PDAF unconstitutional
But in October 2019, SC said that four kinds of lump-sum discretionary funds are constitutional after petitions were filed against the 2014 national budget. According to the High Tribunal, the following types of allocations are allowed:
- unprogrammed fund
- contingency fund
- e-government fund
- local government support fund
