IBP files own plea vs DAP

http://manilastandardtoday.com/2013/10/17/ibp-files-own-plea-vs-dap/

By Rey E. Requejo

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines on Wednesday petitioned the Supreme Court to stop the Palace from further releasing funds under the Disbursement Acceleration Program and to declare it unconstitutional.

In a petition filed by UP Law Dean Pacifico Agabin, the IBP warned that unless the Palace is restrained, taxpayers will suffer irreparable injury because the money they have paid the government was being used illegally.

The IBP suit is the fifth petition filed with the Court seeking to declare DAP as unconstitutional. Others who filed separate petitions are former Iloilo lawmaker Augusto Syjuco, Manuelito Luna, Jose Malvar Villegas and the Philippine Constitution Association.
According to the national lawyers’ group, the disbursement of funds under DAP not only constitutes a grave abuse of discretion, but can also be considered a criminal act because it is technical malversation under the Revised Penal Code.

The IBP argued that the Constitution limited the power of the Executive department as a disbursing authority by releasing only funds that are listed in the General Appropriations Act enacted by Congress.

In this case, they said, DAP was never mentioned in the budget laws covering 2011, 2012 or 2013.

“There is no appropriation for such a program, nor was there any allocation made by Congress therefore. Obviously, this is not a program submitted to Congress for its approval,” the IBP said.

The national organization of lawyers also noted that even Budget Secretary Florencio Abad admitted that the DAP was not in the General Appropriations Act.
“Secretary Abad’s declarations alone render the legality of the DAP doubtful and anomalous,” the IBP said.

The group said that the Executive department cannot justify DAP’s legality by citing Article VI, Section 25(5) of the Constitution, which provides that all appropriation bills shall emanate from the House of Representatives.

The same provision further stipulates that only items in the general appropriations law allocated for the respective offices of President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of constitutional commissions, may be augmented by its own savings, the IBP said.
In this case, the DAP funds, according to the Budget Department, were taken from slow-moving projects, which, the petitioners said “can never be considered completed, abandoned or discontinued.”

Only completed, abandoned or discontinued projects can be used to augment savings, as stated under the General Appropriations Act, the group said.

The IBP also said that the Budget Department failed to give exact details of expenditures where DAP was used and did not specify which “slow-moving” projects lost their funding.
The IBP also questioned why senators were provided with DAP allocations, when they already have their Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) or pork barrel under the GAA.

The lawyers’ group also said the Office of the President and the Budget Department, who were named respondents, violated the Constitution, which states that the President may use savings only to augment an item “for their respective offices.”

The Palace said it would study the IBP petition.

“The Solicitor General will answer for the government,” deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte said. “Offhand, some projects may still need additional funding from savings, such as the reconstruction pro-gram for the areas affected by typhoon Pablo,” she added.
On Wednesday, the Catholic Church kept up its pressure on the government to completely abolish pork barrel and other discretionary funds.

The Church People’s Alliance against Pork Barrel gave members of the House of Representatives copies of letters urging them “not to play deaf and dumb” and instead heed the call of the people to abolish all forms of pork barrel.


The Church group also condemned the DAP as “anomalous and unconstitutional.” – With Joyce Pangco Panares and Vito Barcelo

http://manilastandardtoday.com/2013/10/17/ibp-files-own-plea-vs-dap/