Carpio: PDAF ‘riddled with unconstitutionality’

MANILA, Philippines - As allegations of widespread anomalous use of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) continue to rile the nation, the most senior magistrate in the Supreme Court yesterday criticized the fund, saying it is “riddled with unconstitutionality.”

Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio made his position clear yesterday during oral arguments on the petitions questioning the legality of PDAF or the congressional pork barrel.

He said the legal loopholes were so evident “you do not need a COA report.” COA is the Commission on Audit, whose special audit on PDAF from 2007 to 2009 unearthed cases of widespread misuse of the pork barrel.

Carpio specifically cited provisions in the 2013 General Appropriations Act (GAA) requiring legislative concurrence on the President’s appropriations of PDAF, and allowing Cabinet secretaries and congressional committees to realign funds and give lawmakers the privilege of identifying projects under the funds.

He said these provisions violate the constitutional separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches as well as the system of checks and balances between the two.

“That power (of the President to realign funds) cannot be delegated (to the Cabinet). This power to realign is unconstitutional,” Carpio pointed out.

“When the Constitution says all appropriations shall emanate from the House, it has to be acting as a body, it cannot be one legislator or a committee. A legislator or a House committee is not Congress,” Carpio added.

He said officials appeared to have institutionalized PDAF despite its being illegal.

“It looks like DBM (Department of Budget and Management) just put into law their practice before 2013. It accumulated. They were cognizant legislators can’t execute GAA,” he said.

Carpio said the same is true with the Malampaya funds, whose allocation is also being questioned by petitioners.

He explained that Presidential Decree 910, invoked by the executive department to justify the use of the Malampaya funds for “any other purposes,” was issued during the time of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos when the executive also had legislative power.

But with the enactment of the 1987 Constitution, Carpio pointed out that the President has been stripped of legislative power.

He also said that such power given to the President was an “abdication of Congress of the power to appropriate.”

“So, PD 910 is now facially unconstitutional. You do not need a COA report on that,” he stressed.

Carpio also rebutted the defense of lawmakers that PDAF had been upheld twice by the SC in its ruling on Philconsa v. Enriquez in August 1994 and LAMP vs DBM in April last year.

Carpio’s opinion, however, does not represent the high court’s.

In the same oral argument – the first in history to be livestreamed on the SC website – COA Chairman Grace Pulido-Tan served as amicus curiae (friend of the court) or resource person.

But while Tan provided the high court information on the special audit conducted by her office on the PDAF, she was grilled by Associate Justice Teresita de Castro on why the COA investigation was limited.

Tan said she was only appointed in 2011: “I wish I could answer your question but I was not yet in COA at that time.”

But De Castro did not like her response.

“Don’t blame past COA officials, we rely on institutional continuity. If you did your job we won’t have this problem,” De Castro told the COA chair.

Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno agreed.

For her part, Sereno provided a historical perspective of PDAF and explained how the discretionary funds of Congress evolved.

The oral arguments resume tomorrow and on Oct. 17.

Four lawyers represented the petitioners at yesterday’s debate – Eduardo Bringas, Alfredo Molo III, Aldrich Dy and Samson Alcantara. The petitions were filed by Alcantara along with former Manila councilor Greco Belgica and former Boac, Marinduque mayor Pedrito Nepomuceno.     

People’s congress

 Retired chief justice Reynato Puno, for his part, said outraged citizens should convene a ‘People’s Congress’ to conduct a people’s initiative for the abolition of both PDAF and the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).

“The people should unsheathe and use this power to make laws whenever their elected representatives default in the performance of their sacred duty to enact laws to promote the general interest, or worse, whenever they betray the public trust,” he said in a statement.

“The power is in the hands of the sovereign people and they should use it now. This power is meant to be wielded and should not be a frozen asset in their hands,” he stressed. – With Paolo Romero, Rhodina Villanueva, Evelyn Macairan, Christina Mendez