{"id":621464,"date":"2014-07-19T19:47:56","date_gmt":"2014-07-19T11:47:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/?p=621464"},"modified":"2014-07-19T19:55:28","modified_gmt":"2014-07-19T11:55:28","slug":"petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers","title":{"rendered":"Petitioners\u2019 retort to Palace on DAP issue: We are taxpayers"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

INQUIRER FILE PHOTOS<\/p><\/div>\n

MANILA, Philippines \u2013 As taxpayers, they have every right to complain.<\/p>\n

Petitioners who won the Supreme Court’s favor in questioning the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program reasserted on Saturday their right to bring the case to court after Malaca\u00f1ang challenged their standing in seeking a reversal of the court\u2019s ruling on Friday.<\/p>\n

\u201cPetitioners are taxpayers. Public funds were juggled and used for questionable projects such as extra pork we have for lawmakers,\u201d said Renato Reyes, secretary-general of the militant umbrella group Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan), which was one of the nine petitioners that questioned the constitutionality of what the Palace claims was an economic stimulus program.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe have every reason to assail DAP and demand accountability. Nagpapalusot na naman ang Palasyo [The Palace is trying to get out of the issue again],\u201d Reyes said.<\/p>\n

Malaca\u00f1ang on Friday appealed the Supreme Court’s unanimous July 1 ruling that struck down DAP as unconstitutional for violating budget regulations, particularly the cross-border transfer of savings to other agencies and projects outside the approved General Appropriations Act.<\/p>\n

In its appeal, it asserted that DAP was undertaken in good faith, and asked the court anew to dismiss the petitions lodged against the program for lack of merit. It said the case was \u201cnot justiciable\u201d as the petitioners had \u201cneither been injured nor threatened with injury as a result of DAP.\u201d<\/p>\n

But for lawyer Harry Roque, another petitioner, questioning DAP in court was an exercise of a public right.<\/p>\n

\u201cI’m a taxpayer and [was] injured by illegal expenditure of public funds. I’m also a citizen with a standing to enforce a public right: to ensure the President does not violate the Constitution,\u201d said Roque.<\/p>\n

Dante Jimenez, founding president of petitioner Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption, expressed disappointment over the Palace’s argument and found it discriminatory.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe petitioners are among his (President’s) \u2018bosses.\u2019 That was a very discriminating statement. [The Palace] is in a panicky stage,\u201d Jimenez said.<\/p>\n

In its 13-0 ruling, the Supreme Court said Malaca\u00f1ang must prove in the proper tribunals that it had implemented the program in good faith, implying the possible criminal, civil and administrative liability of \u201cauthors, proponents and implementors\u201d of the discretionary fund augmentation program.<\/p>\n

In separate opinions, several justices said the President had encroached on Congress’ exclusive power of the purse and that Budget Secretary Florencio Abad may have consciously worked around the government’s appropriations rules in implementing DAP.<\/p>\n

In its appeal, Malaca\u00f1ang said the high court itself had undertaken a cross-border transfer of savings in 2012 and attempted to do so again in 2013.<\/p>\n

The Palace said the utilization of funds under DAP has been \u201cdismishing\u201d over the last three years: \u201cfrom P75.1 billion in 2011, P53.2 billion in 2012, to P16 billion in 2013.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThis belies the claim that there was intent to accumulate savings so that the President may use them for discretionary spending. Even before the various present petitions were filed, DAP had already become operationally dead,\u201d said the Palace.<\/p>\n

Several groups, including the VACC and Bayan, are moving for the President’s impeachment over the DAP issue.<\/p>\n

RELATED STORIES<\/p>\n

\u2018SC ruling on DAP: Checks, balances, democracy work\u2019<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

SC declares parts of DAP unconstitutional<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

As taxpayers, they have every right to complain. Petitioners who won the Supreme Court’s favor in questioning the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program reasserted on Saturday their right to bring the case to court after Malaca\u00f1ang challenged their standing in seeking a reversal of the court\u2019s ruling on Friday.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":66,"featured_media":621325,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[34,45],"tags":[3818,110169,52,206124],"byline":[107],"source":[206078],"column":[],"editor":[],"videographer":[],"position":[],"class_list":["post-621464","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-latest-stories","category-nation-latest-stories","tag-bayan","tag-dap","tag-politics","tag-supreme-court","byline-tarra-quismundo","source-philippine-daily-inquirer"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nPetitioners\u2019 retort to Palace on DAP issue: We are taxpayers | Inquirer 黑料社<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"As taxpayers, they have every right to complain. Petitioners who won the Supreme Court's favor in questioning the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program reasserted on Saturday their right to bring the case to court after Malaca\u00f1ang challenged their standing in seeking a reversal of the court\u2019s ruling on Friday.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Petitioners\u2019 retort to Palace on DAP issue: We are taxpayers | Inquirer 黑料社\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"As taxpayers, they have every right to complain. Petitioners who won the Supreme Court's favor in questioning the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program reasserted on Saturday their right to bring the case to court after Malaca\u00f1ang challenged their standing in seeking a reversal of the court\u2019s ruling on Friday.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/files\/2014\/07\/supreme-court-aquino.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@inquirerdotnet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@inquirerdotnet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"ryanl\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Petitioners\u2019 retort to Palace on DAP issue: We are taxpayers | Inquirer 黑料社","description":"As taxpayers, they have every right to complain. Petitioners who won the Supreme Court's favor in questioning the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program reasserted on Saturday their right to bring the case to court after Malaca\u00f1ang challenged their standing in seeking a reversal of the court\u2019s ruling on Friday.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Petitioners\u2019 retort to Palace on DAP issue: We are taxpayers | Inquirer 黑料社","twitter_description":"As taxpayers, they have every right to complain. Petitioners who won the Supreme Court's favor in questioning the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program reasserted on Saturday their right to bring the case to court after Malaca\u00f1ang challenged their standing in seeking a reversal of the court\u2019s ruling on Friday.","twitter_image":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/files\/2014\/07\/supreme-court-aquino.jpg","twitter_creator":"@inquirerdotnet","twitter_site":"@inquirerdotnet","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"ryanl","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers"},"author":{"name":"ryanl","@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/#\/schema\/person\/60146885bab57b93575900a685c74bce"},"headline":"Petitioners\u2019 retort to Palace on DAP issue: We are taxpayers","datePublished":"2014-07-19T11:47:56+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-19T11:55:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers"},"wordCount":553,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/files\/2014\/07\/supreme-court-aquino.jpg","keywords":["Bayan","DAP","Politics","Supreme Court"],"articleSection":["Latest 黑料社 Stories","Nation"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers#respond"]}],"copyrightYear":"2014","copyrightHolder":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.inquirer.net\/#organization"}},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers","url":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers","name":"Petitioners\u2019 retort to Palace on DAP issue: We are taxpayers | Inquirer 黑料社","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/files\/2014\/07\/supreme-court-aquino.jpg","datePublished":"2014-07-19T11:47:56+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-19T11:55:28+00:00","description":"As taxpayers, they have every right to complain. Petitioners who won the Supreme Court's favor in questioning the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program reasserted on Saturday their right to bring the case to court after Malaca\u00f1ang challenged their standing in seeking a reversal of the court\u2019s ruling on Friday.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/files\/2014\/07\/supreme-court-aquino.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/files\/2014\/07\/supreme-court-aquino.jpg","width":"620","height":"344","caption":"INQUIRER FILE PHOTOS"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/621464\/petitioners-retort-to-palace-on-dap-issue-we-are-taxpayers#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"黑料社","item":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Latest 黑料社 Stories","item":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/category\/latest-stories"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Nation","item":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/category\/latest-stories\/nation-latest-stories"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":4,"name":"Petitioners\u2019 retort to Palace on DAP issue: We are taxpayers"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/#website","url":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/","name":"Inquirer 黑料社","description":"Latest Philippine 黑料社 for Filipinos","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/#organization","name":"黑料社","url":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/files\/2020\/02\/inqdefimg.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/files\/2020\/02\/inqdefimg.jpg","width":1920,"height":1080,"caption":"黑料社"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/inquirerdotnet\/","https:\/\/x.com\/inquirerdotnet","https:\/\/instagram.com\/inquirerdotnet","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/c\/inquirerdotnet"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/#\/schema\/person\/60146885bab57b93575900a685c74bce","name":"ryanl","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/60e82133c93afd43634bb2bc74b61ac6?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/60e82133c93afd43634bb2bc74b61ac6?s=96&d=identicon&r=g","caption":"ryanl"}}]}},"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/621464","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/66"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=621464"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/621464\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/621325"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=621464"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=621464"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=621464"},{"taxonomy":"byline","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/byline?post=621464"},{"taxonomy":"source","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/source?post=621464"},{"taxonomy":"column","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/column?post=621464"},{"taxonomy":"editor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/editor?post=621464"},{"taxonomy":"videographer","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/videographer?post=621464"},{"taxonomy":"position","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/newsinfo.inquirer.net\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/position?post=621464"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}