MANILA, Philippines - The Palace is asking the Supreme Court to reconsider its July 1 decision declaring certain acts under the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) illegal.
In a 52-page Motion for Reconsideration (MR) filed yesterday, the executive department insisted that the economic stimulus program designed to accelerate public spending did not violate the Constitution.
“The President and his alter egos, in implementing a decidedly successful program, deserve to be afforded the traditional constitutional presumptions that apply to most other forms of public actions, especially the presumption of good faith,” read the appeal filed by Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza.
At Malacañang, Presidential Communications Operations Office Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. said the filing of the MR is an affirmation of the government’s “respect for the rule of law and its compliance with judicial processes.”
In justifying good faith behind DAP, the Palace urged the high court to consider institutional competence and value of bureaucratic practices in understanding the constitutional role of the executive in managing the economy, the authority of Congress to define savings, the shared role of the political departments in preparing the budget and the limited role of the SC on these matters.
It also argued that the high court erred in applying the doctrine of operative fact, which recognizes the validity of an assailed law or action prior to the determination of its unconstitutionality.
“Regardless of the nullification of certain acts and practices under the DAP and/or National Budget Circular No. 541, the operative fact doctrine does not operate to impute bad faith to authors, proponents and implementers who continue to enjoy the presumption of innocence and regularity in the performance of official functions and duties,” it stressed.
The Palace is insisting DAP was not done in bad faith.
The government has dismissed the notion that the budget department engaged in a policy of accumulating savings so that President Aquino may have funds for his use at will.
It said that if the Aquino administration was bent on accumulating savings, it should not have passed the budget on time and let the previous appropriation be automatically reenacted pursuant to Article VI Section 25(7) of the Constitution.
Under a reenacted budget, all items representing appropriations for a completed work or activity like a P5-billion airport and a P10-billion expressway are automatically converted into savings and are immediately available for use by the President on the first day of the year, government lawyers explained.
“Thus, by the sheer fact of doing nothing, a President immediately generates savings to the tune of the total amount of all appropriations for the funded projects and activities of the previous GAA,” the MR read.
The strategy of generating savings through budget reenactment was employed by the previous administration, which had either a partially or fully reenacted budget for the entire duration of its term, according to the motion.
Jardeleza, who filed the MR with retired SC justice Vicente Mendoza as corroborating counsel, also insisted that cross-border transfers under the DAP are constitutional.
Turning tables on SC
In its MR, the Palace has turned the tables on the SC by citing a supposed cross-border transfer of funds committed by the high court in 2012.
It cited a July 17, 2012 resolution of the SC, then under Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio as acting chief justice, allowing the allocation from existing savings of the court worth P2.38 billion for the construction of Manila City Hall of Justice, Cebu Court of Appeals and Cagayan de Oro Court of Appeals.
It noted that the Court earmarked its existing savings of P1.865 billion to augment the P100-million budget for the Manila Hall of Justice, which is an item in the 2012 budget of the Department of Justice-Office of the Secretary. The DOJ is part of the executive department.
“This is an example of the benign and necessary interaction between interdependent departments. Obviously, the Supreme Court has an interest in the construction of Halls of Justice, and no one can say that this cross-border augmentation was a means by which the judiciary tried to co-opt the Executive,” the Palace argued in its MR.
It added that on March 5, 2013, the Court issued another resolution requesting the Department of Budget Management (DBM) to approve the transfer of the amount of P100 million – which was included in the DOJ- Justice System Infrastructure Program (JUSIP) budget for 2012 for the Manila City Hall of Justice – to the budget of the judiciary, subject to existing budgeting policies and procedures, to be used for the construction of the Malabon Hall of Justice.
“This means that the P100-million allocation will be taken away from the Manila Hall of Justice, which has an item in the 2012 GAA (General Appropriations Act) under the Executive, and used instead to fund the construction of the Malabon Hall of Justice, which has no item in the 2012 or the 2013 GAA,” the Palace added.
The Palace noted that when petitions were filed against the DAP, Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, in a letter dated Dec. 23 last year, informed the DBM that the SC was withdrawing its request to realign the P100 million intended for the Manila Hall of Justice to the budget of the judiciary.
“With all due respect, this is by no means a disapprobation of the Honorable Court. But it does serve to highlight the fact that the Honorable Court’s practice was based on an understanding of the constitutional provision that coincides with the government’s,” it added. Amid the legal battle over DAP, Misamis Occidental Rep. Henry Oaminal said it’s too early to say if the judiciary and executive are bracing for more serious clash. But he stressed the “constitutional process must be observed.”
‘Loose change’
Despite the enormous amount of funds released through DAP, several government hospitals received only “loose change” of P1.116 billion from the P141 billion released for government projects under the discredited program, Bayan Muna Rep. Neri Colmenares said yesterday.
He said regional hospitals directly under the Department of Health received P264.733 million as “financial assistance to indigent patients.”
Among the top recipients were Region 1 Medical Center, which received P41.350 million; Eastern Visayas Regional Medical Center, P19.7 million; and Bicol Medical Center, P19.65 million.
Colmenares said specialty hospitals were given P851.655 million in DAP funds for improvement of facilities and equipment, and assistance to indigent patients.
The Philippine Heart Center received the biggest amount of P390 million, while the Philippine Children’s Medical Center was given P292 million.
Both facilities are located in Quezon City with two other specialty hospitals, namely the Lung Center and the National Kidney and Transplant Institute. – With Jess Diaz, Aurea Calica, Sheila Crisostomo, Gerry Lee Gorit
No comments:
Post a Comment