On April Fools’ Day

The timing could be off, or just coincidental. The Supreme Court (SC) originally set tomorrow the oral arguments on the petitions against the alleged illegal “insertions” in the 2025 budget law. It falls on April 1, a date dubbed as April Fools’ Day. Incidentally, President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. (PBBM) declared April 1 as an official holiday to mark the Islamic Eid’l Fitr on the sighting of the first full moon of the month.

Since tomorrow is a non-working holiday in all government and private offices nationwide anyway, it is for obvious reasons the SC needed to adjust their previously scheduled calendar. The SC, headed by Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo, also agreed on the new dates for the oral arguments on other state-related petitions pending before them.

As rescheduled, the 15-man High Court will hold their summer en banc retreat to tackle the resumption of oral arguments on the petitions against the transfer to the National Treasury of P89.9 billion from the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth). As earlier announced by the SC, the oral arguments on PhilHealth would continue on April 2 and 3, and April 4 if necessary, at the SC compound in Baguio City.

The oral arguments on the alleged illegalities that went through the approval of the 2025 General Appropriations Act (GAA) were reset to May 19. The petition claimed irregularities and purported “blank” line items in the bicameral conference committee (bicam) report on the 2025 GAA. Petitioners also argued that the GAA was unconstitutional for failing to allocate mandatory funding for PhilHealth, unlawfully increasing appropriations beyond the President’s recommendations and allocating the highest budget to infrastructure over education.

Also reset were the petitions related to the questions of legality and constitutionality of the Maharlika Investment Fund (MIF). This is rescheduled on July 8 and 9 at the SC in Padre Faura, Manila. In the originally SC-approved calendar, the 2025 budget was supposed to be tackled first on April 1, followed by the MIF on April 22 and PhilHealth on April 29.

No reason was given for why the so-called “gods of Faura” decided to move back the dates of the oral arguments on these petitions.

Impleaded in all these petitions are the Executive department led by the Office of the President and both chambers of the 19th Congress, all involving the High Court’s co-equal branches of government.

In our Kapihan sa Manila Bay news forum last Wednesday, Senate President Francis Joseph “Chiz” Escudero believes the highest judicial body of the land has no intention to interfere into the internal affairs of either the Executive or the Legislative departments.

“Sa pagkakaunawa ko, ang layunin ng Korte Suprema ay hindi para panghimasukan ang kapangyarihan ng Kongreso kaugnay sa pagbu-budget,” the Senate chief noted. “Ang layunin ng Korte Suprema ay tiyakin na yong proseso ay hindi pinasa sa mga hindi halal ng bayan na clerk lamang o staff lamang sa bicam. ‘Yan ay kayang-kayang patunayan ng Kongreso kapag dumating yung punto ng oral arguments kaugnay ng kasong ito,” Escudero pointed out.

Escudero told us the Office of the Solicitor General (Sol-Gen) will defend the Senate in this petition. In his latest communications with Sol-Gen Menardo Guevarra, Escudero got the commitment of the so-called “tribune of the people” to represent them in the crafting of this year’s budget law.

He cited Sol-Gen Guevarra merely “recused” from defending the Executive department on the habeas corpus petitions to bring back our country’s former president Rodrigo Duterte.

Quoting the Sol-Gen, the Senate President echoed his confidence the SC will eventually uphold the validity of the Congress-approved 2025 GAA subsequently signed into law by PBBM. “Yes, because the bicam report is clear. We authorized the finance committee and appropriations committee to fill in any gaps to make any correction, given that the budget bill consists of over 200,000 lines at hindi porke’t may blanko ay babalik kami sa bicam, hindi na kami matatapos,” Escudero asserted.

A veteran lawmaker and lawyer himself, Escudero pointed to the legislative procedures and practices done even in the budget laws approved every year by Congresses past. In particular, the Senate chief cited: “Ang huling talata ng bicam report ino-awtorisa ang appropriations committee at finance committee na punuan ang mga pagkukulang, i-correct ang mga pagkakamali at ‘yong mga addition, subtract, itama din kung may mali.”

“So that authority was given within the parameters of the delegated authority given by the bicam to the respective House and Senate committees,” Escudero stressed. The 12 senators in the bicam on the 2025 GAA have “actual signatures” and not electronic signatures, he added.

According to an advisory issued by the SC last Feb.18, the preliminary issues in the 2025 GAA oral arguments will tackle:

• Whether the petitioners have legal standing to sue;

• Whether the issues raised involve an actual and justiciable controversy;

• Whether the petitioners’ direct resort to the court is proper and

• Whether the issue of constitutionality is the lis mota (Latin term for cause or motivation of a legal action) of the case.

The SC also laid down substantive issues will be limited to the following:

• Whether the GAA violates Section 15, Article II of the Constitution in relation to Section 10 to 11 and 37 of the Universal Health Care Act;

• Whether the 2025 GAA violates Section 25 (1), Article VI of the Constitution;

• Whether the 2025 GAA violates Section 5(5), Article XIV of the Constitution which mandates the highest budgetary priority to be given to education and

• Whether the 2025 GAA violates Section 27, Article VI of the Constitution when the BiCam members submitted a report on the GAB with blank items.

But just last Friday, another set of petition was filed to seek SC intervention to stop the distribution of P26.159 billion of Ayuda para sa Kapos ang Kita Program (AKAP). Included in the same 2025 GAA, the 1Sambayan, Sanlakas petitioners charged this alleged “pork-barrel” provision was also inserted by the bicam.