Articles About Pdaf

8/10/2019 Articles About Pdaf

1/4

1. SC STRIKES DOWN CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF DAP AS

UNCONSTITUTIONAL

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/368123/news/nation/sc-strikes-

down-certain-provisions-of-dap-as-unconstitutional

JULY 1, 2014

The Supreme Court has voted unanimously to strike down as unconstitutional

specific acts under the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) of

the Aquino government.

In a press briefing in Manila on Tuesday, SC spokesman Theodore Te said the high

court sitting en banc declared the following "acts and practices" under the DAP,National Budget Circular No. 541, and related issuances as unconstitutional:

- the withdrawal of unobligated allotments from the implementing agencies, and the

declaration of the withdrawn unobligated allotments and unreleased appropriations

as savings prior to the end of the fiscal year and without complying with the statutory

definition of savings contained in the General Appropriations Act;

- the cross-border transfers of the savings of the executive to augment the

appropriations of other offices outside the executive; and

- the funding of projects, activities and programs that were not covered by any

appropriation in the GAA.

Te said these acts violated Section 25 (5) Article VI of the 1987 Constitution and the

doctrines of separation of powers.

The National Budget Circular No. 541, which sanctions the DAP, allows the DBM to

withdraw unobligated allotments of agencies with low levels of obligations as of

June 30, 2012, both for continuing and current allotments.

The court also ruled as void the portion of the DAP that allows the use of

unprogrammed funds even without a certification from the National Treasurer saying

that revenue collections exceeded the revenue targets due to non-compliance with

the conditions provided in the relevant GAA.

Te said the high court en banc voted 13-0-1, with Associate Justice Teresita

Leonardo-De Castro recusing.
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/368123/news/nation/sc-strikes-down-certain-provisions-of-dap-as-unconstitutionalhttp://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/368123/news/nation/sc-strikes-down-certain-provisions-of-dap-as-unconstitutionalhttp://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/368123/news/nation/sc-strikes-down-certain-provisions-of-dap-as-unconstitutionalhttp://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/368123/news/nation/sc-strikes-down-certain-provisions-of-dap-as-unconstitutional


2/4

A court insider said the petitioners were "partially granted" because "other prayers of

the petitioners, like the disclosure of documents, were not granted because they

were moot."

Nine petitions have been filed with the high court contesting the legality of the DAP,a discretionary fund that hit the headlines after Sen. Jinggoy Estrada revealed that

several senators received P50 million to P100 million after the conviction of Chief

Justice Renato Corona by the Senate impeachment court.

Te said the dispositive portion of the ruling did not mention anything about liabilities

of the government officials involved in the DAP.

Asked to comment on the SC ruling, presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda said

in a text message sent to GMA News Online that they will wait first for the full

decision to come out.

"We are not in a position to make a comment until we see the full decision," he said.

Savings or presidential pork barrel?

The Aquino government said the fund came from "unobligated allotments of all

agencies with low level of obligations as of June 30, 2012 both for continuing and

current allotment" that President Benigno Aquino III ordered withdrawn on June 27,

2012.

The withdrawn funds were deemed as savings by Aquino and Budget Sec.

Florencio "Butch" Abad, and realigned to augment existing programs and projects of

other agencies and fund priority programs and projects not considered in the 2012

budget but expected to be started or implemented within the current year.

But the petitioners have argued the DAP funds could not be artificially deemed as

savings as defined by the Department of Budget and Management and the General

Appropriations Act of 2012 since there couldn't be savings in the middle of a fiscal

year, especially if the projects or programs for which these funds were allocated by

law, haven't been completed, discontinued or abandoned.

They said the funds accumulated through the DAP were part of the presidential pork

barrel, where only the sitting President, or in this case, Aquino, can determine where

the funds will go. They said this could be used for patronage politics.

During oral arguments last January, the government had insisted that the SC debate

on the issue was already moot since the Aquino administration has already stopped

the implementation of the DAP.


3/4

Abad, during the Jan. 28 debates, said the countrys economic managers have

already recommended to Aquino to stop the implementation of the DAP.

Malacaang had reiterated the President's statement that DAP was essential in

boosting economic growth.

Te said copies of the resolution would be available "within the next few days."

"The decision itself will be promulgated as soon as editing is done and separate

opinions are submitted," he said.

The SC spokesman said separate opinions will be submitted by Senior Associate

Justice Antonio Carpio, and Associate Justices Arturo Brion, Mariano del Castillo,

Estela Perlas-Bernabe and Marvic Leonen. With a report fromKimberly Jane

Tan/KG/YA/KBK, GMA News

2. UNDERSTANDING THE PORK BARREL

BY: HONORABLE PROSPERO NOGRALES AND HONORABLE EDCEL

LAGMAN

http://www.congress.gov.ph/download/14th/pork_barrel.pdf

3. Pork Barrel and the Exposition of Philippine Constitutional Design

www.academia.edu/4532154/Pork_Barrel_and_the_Exposition_of_Philip

pine_Constitutional_Design

4. STAGES OF PORK-BARREL POLITICS

The term pork-barrel usually refers to the budgetary spending intended to benefit

limited groups of constituents in return for their political supports. In many cases, thetargeted beneficiaries are geographically defined voters, and therefore, pork-barrel

politics is usually more prominent in countries with single-member electoral system

as in the case of Philippine Congress (Lower House). It should be noted, however,

that in some instances the beneficiaries are non-territorial basis, the typical

examples of which exist in Europe. In the Philippine context, the head-aching fact is

that at each stage of budget formulation, the chance of distributive politics kicks in,

and therefore, the term is often used with different connotations.

HISTORY OF PORK-BARREL
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/archives/authors/kimberlyjanetanhttp://www.gmanetwork.com/news/archives/authors/kimberlyjanetanhttp://www.congress.gov.ph/download/14th/pork_barrel.pdfhttp://www.academia.edu/4532154/Pork_Barrel_and_the_Exposition_of_Philippine_Constitutional_Designhttp://www.academia.edu/4532154/Pork_Barrel_and_the_Exposition_of_Philippine_Constitutional_Designhttp://www.academia.edu/4532154/Pork_Barrel_and_the_Exposition_of_Philippine_Constitutional_Designhttp://www.academia.edu/4532154/Pork_Barrel_and_the_Exposition_of_Philippine_Constitutional_Designhttp://www.congress.gov.ph/download/14th/pork_barrel.pdfhttp://www.gmanetwork.com/news/archives/authors/kimberlyjanetanhttp://www.gmanetwork.com/news/archives/authors/kimberlyjanetan


4/4

The primitive form of what could be denoted as pork-barrel in the Philippines

emerged in 1922, when Public Works Act was passed. From 1950, it was made clear

that the Congress was allowed to specify the projects which were to be funded under

the Act, and from 1955, those legislature-sponsored projects were segregated from

all other items under the name community projects. Eventually, these communityprojects were further subdivided into miscellaneous community projects, those

specified by the Congressmen, and nationwideselected projects, those specified

by the Senators2. Throughout the Marcos regime, the major arena for pork-barrel

funding was Public Works Appropriations under this Act, a multi-year appropriation

for infrastructure projects set aside from the rest of the national budget. Regarding

this Appropriations, the Congress had complete freedom to change Presidents

proposal or even enact new and larger appropriations. Because Public Works

Appropriations was a multi-year appropriation, and since not all parts of the

appropriations coming out of the Congress are backed up by available funds, there

was always a substantial accumulation of unimplemented projects from previous

years3. After the democratization in 1986, pork-barrel was eventually incorporated

into the general budget. Currently, there is no separate budget appropriation outside

of the regular budget proposal. This, on one hand, improved the transparency of the

budget system, at least superficially. Pork-barrel nevertheless did not cease to exist.

Rather, they took different forms of budgetary items within the general budget and

thus became even more invisible.

5.

Documents

Articles About Pdaf