MANILA, Philippines鈥揥hile it dismissed outright two petitions questioning the 2015 national budget, the Supreme Court has given due course to a third legal action filed against the 2015 General Appropriations Act (GAA).
The high court en banc in a resolution issued on Tuesday ordered the respondent government officials to respond in 10 days to a petition for certiorari and prohibition that several taxpayers filed last week questioning the constitutionality of the P2.6-trillion national budget.
On Tuesday, the high court decided to dismiss for lack of merit two petitions that former Iloilo Congressman Augusto Syjuco Jr. filed late last year seeking the same relief.
Premature
The court ruled that the Syjuco petitions questioning the GAA in November and then the supplemental budget in December were premature and lacked substantial grounds to merit further proceedings.
Asked to comment on the third petition were respondents Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa Jr., Budget Secretary Florencio Abad, Senate President Franklin Drilon and House Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr.
The third petition, filed on Jan. 5, questioned the validity of the 2015 budget for allocating lump sums similar to the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP), the presidential discretionary fund which the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional last July.
It was filed by former Biliran Congressman Glenn Chong and taxpayers Manuelito Luna, Aristarchus Lamarck DC Luna and the Samahang Magbabasura Inc., and also sought a preliminary injunction to stop government agencies from using the national budget pending the resolution of the case.
According to the petitioners, the 2015 GAA contained 鈥渃onstituent provisions, funds, allocations or items [that] are intrinsically infirm and therefore void.鈥�
These included, among others, funding for the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council, the Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Program, 鈥渕iscellaneous鈥� personnel benefits, international commitments and allocations for local governments.
Unprecedented breach
The petitioners said these items encroached upon Congress鈥� exclusive power of the purse, comparing such 鈥渦nparalleled and unprecedented鈥� breach with the martial law period.
鈥淒ue to the innumerable and significant lump sums in the 2015 GAA, a considerable number of which are automatically appropriated, Congress鈥� vaunted spending power has become illusory, and that Congress itself had become a surplusage,鈥� the petition read.
It said the 2015 budget law鈥檚 provisions on 鈥渟avings and the augmentation and use of savings,鈥� and on the 鈥渦se and availment of the unprogrammed appropriations鈥� were akin to a mechanism under the nullified DAP.