By Ellen Tordesillas
THE P2.6 trillion 2015 budget submitted by Malacañang to Congress will institutionalize the practices in the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) which the Supreme Court had declared unconstitutional.
In the 2015 budget proposal, “savings” is now defined as portions of allocations that “have not been released or obligated” due to “discontinuance or abandonment of a program, activity or project for justifiable causes, at any time during the validity of the appropriations.”
With this definition, President Aquino and Budget Secretary Florencio Abad can hijack funds allocated under the 2015 General Appropriations Act as what they did with DAP the past three years.
The new definition of “savings” differed from what was in the 2011, 2012 and 2013 GAA which referred to funds that are “still available after the completion, or final discontinuance, or abandonment of the work, activity or purpose for which the appropriation is authorized.”
Both chambers of Congress are dominated by Aquino’s allies so it’s expected that the new definition of savings would be adopted. Aquino and Abad can juggle the funds just like they did with DAP without fear of being charged with violation of the law.
Lawyer Joel Butuyan of Roque and Butuyan Law Office sees danger in the institutionalization of DAP measures. A vigilant public could be an antidote to the abuses it would engender. That’s why, he said, it is important that the public is empowered with the Freedom of Information law.
Butuyan’s note:
“My beef with the Aquino administration’s attempt to institutionalize the DAP is that it represents a shortsighted view of what’s good for the country. The DAP gives the President enormous discretion in spending the people’s money. By wanting the Supreme Court to engrave in stone this Presidential discretionary power, the Aquino administration or any president – good, bad, evil, witch, gremlin, e.t., mangkukulam, kapre, maligno – now and forevermore wants any to enjoy this power. To plagiarize Conrad De Quiroz, there lies the rub.
“The Aquino administration is only myopically looking at what glorious good it can do during its two remaining years in office, if allowed unfettered use of DAP powers. It is not thinking what horrendous damage it can do to the country under subsequent presidents with black achy breaky hearts.
“The Aquino Administration fails to realize that a lot of the reforms it is doing are character-dependent reforms. Anti-corruption campaign, infrastructure projects, stringent tax and customs collection etc. are all character-dependent reforms. The success and impact of these reforms depend entirely on the character of the sitting president. A kupal and kapalmuks president gets elected to power and he/she can completely reverse course and bring back the cabaret dancing old days of “what are we in power for?”
“This is why I do not understand Aquino’s intransigent refusal to push and shove – with all his presidential might – for the passage of the Freedom of Information Act (FOI).
“If Aquino wants to have a lasting legacy, the passage of the FOI will be the history-defining landmark of his presidency. The FOI law will have the impact of an EDSA revolution. With the passage of the FOI law, the people will no longer have to necessarily embark on a revolution to make government accountable. The people will only have to avail of the FOI mechanism in order to demand information, demand documents, and make the government accountable for its actions.
“If the President wants his character-dependent reforms to continue beyond the years and decades of his term, he must arm the people with the power to scrutinize every nook and cranny of governmental action. Allow the glare of public scrutiny to illuminate even the deep recesses of government.
“ If the President does not work mighty hard for the passage of the FOI law, it is clear that he only wants bragging rights, an ego trip – ‘This is how clean and good I was during my term, and this is how bad we are now’ – and not legacy.
“Move heaven and earth to pass the FOI law, Mr. President. You have to move it, move it . . . . you have to move it, move it.”
No comments:
Post a Comment