CEBU, Philippines- The legal battle over the Disbursement Acceleration Program isn’t over.
President Aquino openly questioned yesterday the unanimous ruling of the Supreme Court, which declared key portions of the DAP unconstitutional, and said his administration would seek a reversal of the decision.
In a 20-minute address to his “bosses” the people last night, the president also alluded to something that he said the SC had done in the past that could be worse than the DAP, but which the executive believed deserved the presumption of regularity. Why, he asked, couldn’t the high tribunal do the same for the DAP?
Aquino did not go into details, but reliable sources said it involved over P1 billion in judiciary funds that his political allies are set to look into when the 17th Congress opens at the end of the month.
The speech put the president on a collision course with the nation’s highest court. Some quarters considered it defiance and raised concerns over a looming constitutional crisis and anarchy.
With his Cabinet and congressional leaders in the audience at Malacañang, the President again defended the DAP, tracing its history and blaming the corruption in the administration of his predecessor Gloria Arroyo for creating the need to set up a stimulus program.
Malacañang also released the full list of DAP funded projects.
Aquino sidestepped calls for the resignation of Budget Secretary Florencio Abad, who was in the audience and who is painted as the architect of the DAP.
The SC decision said Abad could be held liable for the DAP. The budget chief, one of the president’s most trusted aides, faces a plunder complaint in connection with the stimulus program, for which he could be arrested and held without bail.
Insisting that “DAP is good; our intentions, our processes, and the results were correct,” the president urged SC justices, in a speech delivered mainly in Filipino: “Help us help our countrymen… Do not bar us from doing what we swore to do.”
He stressed that he did not want a clash between the executive and judicial branches as he announced that the administration is preparing to file a motion for reconsideration of the SC ruling.
Reliable sources said Malacañang had strongly lobbied for the DAP to be upheld. Some SC justices were reportedly willing to go along if Abad would be replaced.
Malacañang refused, and sent word that an adverse ruling would lead to a public scrutiny of over P1 billion in special allowances for judges and justices or SAJJ, which is apart from the Judiciary Development Fund.
The sources said SC justices apparently felt blackmailed. Their vote for the DAP, initially at 9-3 against the stimulus program, became unanimous on July 3.
Aquino likened himself to a motorist who parks in a no-parking area to save an injured accident victim, and is being punished for breaking parking regulations.
His situation “might be even worse,” he said. “I am after all being arrested for parking in an area that up to now hasn’t yet been declared a no-parking zone. Is this reasonable?”
Reiterating his defense of good faith, he said, “We did not break the law when we implemented DAP.”
And unlike the congressional pork barrel or Priority Development Assistance Fund from which lawmakers are accused of skimming billions, he said the government did not steal people’s money through the stimulus program.
“We do not want two equal branches of government to go head to head, needing a third branch to step in to intervene,” he emphasized.
Use it or lose it
Endemic corruption characterized the budgeting system in the Arroyo administration and did not benefit the people, Aquino said.
But another problem arose as his new administration moved to clean up spending and implementation. Projects and programs moved slowly, and underspending affected projects needed especially by the poor such as irrigation.
That was when they started looking at savings. Sometimes savings are good, he said, but sometimes they mean under-utilization of funds that could otherwise be put to better use.
The SC, in its ruling, said only funds left over from programmed appropriations at the end of the fiscal year can be classified as savings and impounded by the executive.
Aquino said this would mean a wait of several months for the funds to be utilized and for public biddings to be held.
Projects needing immediate funding would have to be delayed, he said, citing relocation efforts that must be completed before the typhoon season. It’s a case of “use it or lose it,” he argued.
He did not mention that the Office of the President has billions in calamity funds for emergency purposes. Aquino cited the DAP for ending the shortage of classrooms and completion of village electrification.
Addressing SC justices, he said, “We ask that you review your decision, this time taking into consideration the points I have raised… The nation hopes for your careful deliberation and response. And I hope that once you’ve examined the arguments I will submit, regarding the law and about our economy, solidarity will ensue — thus strengthening the entire government’s capability to push for the interests of the nation.”
He wondered why the SC did not consider the legal basis for the DAP, which was the Administrative Code of 1987.
Aquino also noted that the SC itself, the World Bank and even critics of the DAP admitted that the stimulus program helped improve the economy.
He asked for clarity in the SC ruling, adding, “Perhaps they can even identify DAP’s negative effect on the country.”
In defense of DAP
Senator Teofisto “TG” Guingona believes that DAP has created a good economy.
“Di gyud maayo nga i-impeach ang president because of DAP. DAP has a very good economic consequences in the country and figures would show that,” said Guingona, who was in Cebu yesterday to attend the 2014 Luzon Island Cluster Conference of the League of Municipalities of the Philippines.
Guingona, chairman of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, said that Congress will pass the 2015 national budget after the president will deliver his State of the Nation Address on July 28.
“This year no more DAP and Congress will pass the national budget after his SONA. So, kung naa ma’y mga projects nga na-affected tungod kay wa na’y DAP, with the new budget naa na man nganha makalista ang mga proyekto,” Guingona said.
Department of Interior and Local Government Secretary Mar Roxas, who also attended the same event, said that after the Supreme Court declared DAP unconstitutional, they have had to stop some of their DAP-funded projects.
The DAP was approved by the president on October 12, 2011, upon the recommendation of the Development Budget Coordination Committee and the Cabinet Clusters.
It added that the DAP was conceptualized in September 2011 and introduced in October 2011, in the context of the prevailing underspending in government disbursements for the first eight months of 2011 that dampened the country’s economic growth. — Philippine STAR News Service with/BRP) (FREEMAN)