De Lima, Erice ask Supreme Court to strike down P150-B unprogrammed funds
MANILA, Philippines — The P150-billion unprogrammed appropriations in the 2026 national budget are now under legal scrutiny after minority lawmakers filed a petition on Thursday, January 8, to have them struck down as unconstitutional.
Rep. Leila de Lima (ML Party-list) and Rep. Edgar Erice (Caloocan, 2nd District) filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition, requesting a temporary restraining order and other injunctive reliefs to stop the use of unprogrammed funds in 2026.
Citing five provisions of the 1987 Constitution, the minority lawmakers argued that the unprogrammed appropriations have no place in the national budget, given that they have no clear and definite source of financing.
Petition cites constitutional limits
The petition describes the "standby funds" as a prohibited rider in the GAA, contending that they were included only to facilitate the bill’s approval despite being unrelated to its core purpose of allocating programmed funds.
"Since the budget consists of line item, the Unprogrammed Appropriations which are lump-sum in character, deviates (sic) from the line-item appropriations," the petition read.
Article VI, Section 25 of the Constitution specifically caps the budget at the level proposed by the executive branch, a limit that critics say is breached because unprogrammed appropriations are excluded from the P6.793-trillion budget.
Another provision, Article VII, Section 22, also requires the national budget to be based on clearly identified expenditures and sources of financing, not on uncertain revenue.
These are the same provisions cited by Supreme Court Justice Ramon Paul Hernando in his concurring and dissenting opinion when the court ruled against the transfer of PhilHealth reserve funds to unprogrammed appropriations.
How unprogrammed funds work
Unprogrammed appropriations are funded only if excess revenues are generated, new taxes are imposed and collected, or additional loans and grants become available. This means projects or programs under unprogrammed appropriations can proceed only if funds materialize. If no excess funds are generated, the projects will not be implemented.
"They allow the government to spend beyond its declared means under the guise of 'excess revenue,' creating an unregulated space where public funds can be moved like chess pieces without the rigor of the standard legislative process," the petition read.
The unprogrammed appropriations have existed in the national budget since 1989. However, the so-called "standby funds" have ballooned in recent years, especially under the Marcos administration.
The president initially proposed P249.9 billion for unprogrammed appropriations in the 2026 National Expenditure Program (NEP). While the House and Senate trimmed the amount during deliberations, the bicameral conference committee raised it back to P243 billion.
Marcos eventually vetoed P92.5 billion following public backlash in an attempt to restore public trust, retaining just three programs and projects.
The petition for certiorari and prohibition would trigger a Supreme Court review of the unprogrammed appropriations and lead to a final verdict on whether such funding is legal and may continue to be implemented.
"Left unchecked, Section XLIII (of the 2026 GAA) will operate as a constitutional workaround, allowing public funds to be released and spent outside the discipline imposed by the Constitution," the petitioners said.
"Because public expenditures, once made, are irreversible, immediate judicial intervention is imperative to prevent grave and irreparable injury to the public treasury," it added.
- Latest
- Trending
