File photo of Budget Sec. Florencio Abad
MANILA, Philippines – Malacañang and the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) can be held liable for the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) if proven that the fund scheme was used in bad faith, the Supreme Court said.
In the 92-page decision published on Wednesday, the Supreme Court said "authors, proponents and implementors" of the DAP can't get off the hook "unless there are concrete findings of good faith in their favor by the proper tribunals determining their criminal, civil, administrative and other liabilities."
The high court said the doctrine of operative fact, which sustains the effects of an act recognized as unconstitutional, only applies to completed programs, activities or projects under the DAP and the beneficiaries who relied in good faith on the validity of stimulus package.
"Those who acted in bad faith or with gross negligence cannot invoke the doctrine. Likewise, those directly responsible for an illegal or unconstitutional act cannot invoke the doctrine," Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio said in his separate opinion.
Justice Arturo Brion, meanwhile, said the high court has no jurisdiction to make any ruling on the criminal, civil, or administrative liability of the DAP proponents, particularly DBM Secretary Florencio Abad.
But he noted that there were transgressions found in Abad's performance of duties when evidence showed that his actions "negate the presumption of good faith."
"To be specific about this disclaimer, aside from the many admissions outlined elsewhere in the Opinion, there are indicators showing that the DBM Secretary might have established the DAP knowingly aware that it is tainted with unconstitutionality," Brion said in a separate opinion.
The magistrate said during the oral arguments for the DAP, Abad admitted that he has an extensive knowledge of both the legal and practical operations of the budget.
And during his questioning of Abad, Brion said their verbal exchange negates any claim by the Cabinet official that he did not know the legal implications of what he was doing.
"As a lawyer and with at least 12 years of experience behind him as a congressman who was even the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, it is inconceivable that he did not know the illegality or unconstitutionality that tainted his brainchild," Brion said.
"Armed with all these knowledge, it is not hard to believe that he can run circles around the budget and its processes, and did, in fact, purposely use this knowledge for the administration’s objective of gathering the very funds collected under the DAP," he also said.
Brion also said that Carpio had cited examples of why Abad could not have been acting in good faith. He added that Associate Justice Lucas Bersamin had also his showed that Abad knew of the constitutional provisions that the DAP was violating.
When the DAP first went under fire last year, the Aquino administration and the DBM defended the fund scheme, saying it has Constitutional and legal bases.
Presidential Spokesperson Edwin Lacierda also claimed yesterday that the DAP was done in good faith.
No comments:
Post a Comment