X44"A bridge is constructed from illegally augmented funds. The government officials who supervised in good faith the construction cannot be forcedto reimburse the government. Neither may injustice be heaped on suppliers of construction materials by refusing to pay them."

Example lang ito ni Judge but truth of this DAP, these are what's lying UNDERNEATH, HIDDEN and financially ESSENTIAL of the DAP usage. Please dig on the so called GOOD FAITH, COA

Edgar Lores  • If savings can be realized from two sources – that is, (a) unprogrammed funds and (b) programmed funds that are not spent - the question remains: What can be done with these savings?

(Part of the answer lies in the power of augmentation although this applies only to source (b) and only to the top offices of each branch and to the Consitutional Commissions.)

The main options are to spend or not to spend.

If not to spend, the savings can remain (unprogrammed funds) in the Treasury or be returned (programmed funds) to the Treasury. This windfall can be used for futureallocations in the next budget. Better still, it can be used to form the basis of a Future Fund to assist future administrations meet the cost of future public welfare schemes, such as the conditional cash transfer program. This option, while the safest, is inefficient in that funds are underutilized.

If to spend, the initiative taken by the Executive seems to be commendable for its positive impact on the economy. (The Executive should be recognized and thanked for this and not be solely vilified.) Perhaps the Constitution should be changed to enhance the power of augmentation of the Executive as envisioned by DAP. In consonance with this and to counter any suggestion of impropriety, Congress should prioritize a list of “dream projects” that are pies in the sky but have no allocations for lack of funds. (These projects would be the household equivalent of saving for a new car or a trip to Rio.) The savings can then be channeled to the realization of these dreams. This would be an efficient utilization of funds and takes timely advantage of the multiplier effect.

buninay1 • 17 hours agoThe DAP's having a prospective effects only resonates with the end justifying the means. Since the DAP is said to have made a positive impact on the country's economy, its unconstitutionality means only that a repeat of executive

order tinkering with the revenue surplus should be avoided at all costs. As to the criminal liability of the people privy to DAP preparation and implementation, the SC decision is silent on that. It is up to congress if it will impeach or not the President who approved of DAP that was allocated to members of both houses of congress. This smacks really of the supercilious conspiracy of the powerful blocs in our govt, the ones that recite the mantra, "What are we in power for?"

The power holders in our govt especially those in the executive are many steps ahead of the public when it comes to questions of constitutionality. Presumably, the DAP engineers knew from the very beginning that it is unconstitutional but went ahead with it anyway. At stake was the ouster of SC Chief Justice Renato Corona. A quid pro quo for exactly Corona's axing, the DAP was liberally handed out despite constitutional doubts hanging in the air. The economic upgrade attributed to its release is just an afterthought, a clobbered up effort precisely to adorn DAP with impressive figures in order to justify its creation and release. Magsaysay used to ask his cabinet men and advisers,"Can we defend this project or decision in Plaza Miranda?"

The DAP was our version of Iran-Contra affair in the US in which proceeds of sale of arms to Iran purportedly to secure the release of american hostages in Lebanon, were diverted to fund the anti-communist Contras in Nicaragua. Though not as complex, the DAP has adopted the Iran-Contra affair's defense of being a necessary evil. Projected as economic stimulus package, DAP was actually used to unseat Corona at the expense of the constitution. As Manong Johnny said in his effective senatorial campaign ad, "Gusto ko, Happy ka." The multimillion peso bonanza for the lawmakers of both houses of congress indeed made not only Janette Napoles but also the sharecropping lawmakers blissful.

This, friends, and countrymen, is how our checking and balancing govt works. Our officials can breach the limits of the constitution and come out as clean and shiny as DBM Secretary's pate. They have the SC itself to rule that the student body has erred short of being dragged to the nearest prison available. They have the whole congress timidly toeing the line not the least convulsed that the constitution has been violated. What of marriage contract, it is just a piece of paper! What of constitution, it is just a piece of document!

cogito728sum   buninay1  • 8 hours ago"What power has the law [or the Constitution] where only money rules?" It took us two millennia to answer this fundamental political question by Pretonius Arbiter, a question whose truism is being confirmed by this DAP issue. Many would disagree with your points but an open non-partisan mind would not fail to understand them. Indeed, it is

inconceivable for a lawyer legislator, who was once chair of the Appropriation Committee, not to have a foreknowledge of the legal implications of his brainchild. It is very clear that in the formulation of this National Budget Circular 541, there was a breach of protocol, to put it mildly, that cannot be justified by its purpose. People must realize that it is not the economic nor other ancillary benefit that is in question but the exercise of power within legally permissible perimeters for once it is exercised beyond that limit, a dictatorship is born. Merci!