SC ruling a win for democracy

ON DISTANT SHORE
By Val G. Abelgas

(Credit: UNTV)

The 14-0-1 voting by the Supreme Court declaring as unconstitutional the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) and the use of Malampaya Fund for purposes other than energy-related projects gives us a hopeful sign that democracy is alive and well in the Philippines.

The unanimous vote showed that the Judiciary is not subservient to the Executive Branch and is ready to intervene when the balance of power among the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government is being manipulated in favor of one over the others.

It’s noteworthy that even the four justices appointed by President Aquino – Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, Justices Bienvenido Reyes, Estela Perlas Bernabe and Marvic Leonen – voted against the illegal disbursement of government funds by Malacanang and the illegal participation of senators and congressmen in the implementation of the budget after they have passed them. It is also worthwhile to note that one of Aquino’s appointees, Bernabe, wrote the landmark decision.

Lawyer Oscar Franklin Tan, who co-chairs the Philippine Bar Association’s committee on constitutional law, explained in very plain language in an article in the Philippine Daily Inquirer the reasons set forth by the Supreme Court in junking the PDAF.

“First, our Grade 6 social studies classes taught us that Congress drafts the budget and the executive branch spends the money. Giving lawmakers authority over project implementation thus blatantly violates the separation of powers. Second, Congress is supposed to oversee implementation, and lawmakers’ participation distorts this oversight role. Third, there is Carpio’s inspired argument that because the Constitution gives the president a veto over line items, the budget must thus contain line items. Fourth, the high court also argued that lawmakers are “national officers” and their pork allows them to intervene in local governments, subverting the local autonomy also emphasized in the Constitution.”

The Supreme Court also restricted the so-called presidential pork. The court struck down, the phrase in the Malampaya Fund that allows its use for “such other purposes as may hereafter be directed by the President” in addition to energy-related uses, and the phrase “to finance the priority infrastructure development projects” from the President’s Social Fund as unrelated to socio-civic uses.

The tribunal also nullified the laws that provided lawmakers lump-sum allocations to fund their chosen projects. “All informal practices of similar import and effect, which the Court similarly deems to be acts of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of discretion,” are also declared void. Accordingly the Court’s temporary injunction dated Sept. 10, 2013 is hereby declared to be permanent. Thus, the disbursement/release of the remaining PDAF funds allocated for the year 2013, as well as for all previous years…are hereby enjoined,” the high court said.

For years, the Office of the President had used pork barrel funds (previously known as Community Development Fund) as carrot and stick to make Congress follow its dictates, which made the President very powerful and tilted the balance of power towards the Executive Branch. The lawmakers did not give a hoot because they benefited from them. It is a clear case of conspiracy between Malacanang and Congress.

Because the Supreme Court previously upheld the legality of the pork barrel twice, President Aquino was obviously emboldened to increase the PDAF allocation to P25 billion a year, from an average of just P4 billion yearly during the terms of Presidents Ramos and Estrada and P7 billion during the term of President Arroyo.

Malacanang and the lawmakers would have gotten away with misusing the people’s money and would have continued misappropriating the funds. Revelations that P10 billion in pork barrel funds went to ghost projects and non-existing NGOs, most of them formed by businesswoman Janet Lim Napoles, awakened the people to the reality that they were being deceived and robbed by the leaders they had elected into office, the same persons who were supposed to promote and protect their interests.

We would have expected Aquino, who rose to the presidency on a promise to curb corruption, to eliminate this greatest source of corruption in the country, but instead he opted to increase it nearly four-fold to solidify his control of Congress.

Not content with giving away P200 million annually to each senator and P70 million to each congressman, Aquino even tapped a fund he had established without the benefit of a law passed by Congress called Disbursement Acceleration Program to ensure compliance of Congress reportedly in his successful mission to impeach and convict Chief Justice Renato Corona and to pass the Reproductive Health Law.

The DAP funds came from accumulated savings of government agencies, which under the law, according to legal experts, cannot be transferred to other departments nor used without the express authority of Congress.

The Supreme Court is expected to start deliberations on the DAP, whose constitutionality has also been questioned by various group. We cannot find any reason why the DAP would escape the censure of the Supreme Court after it effectively killed the PDAF.

The Court cannot rule otherwise because any ruling that upholds the DAP and other presidential pork would defeat the very reason they rejected the PDAF. A ruling that would allow the continued use by Malacanang of government savings to control Congress would create an even stronger presidency, which would negate the principles of balance of power, checks and balances and separation of powers, and deal a severe blow to democracy.

(valabelgas@aol.com)