DISBURSEMENT ACCELARATION PROGRAM AND ITS CONSTITUTIONALITY

A Research Paper

Maeriam S. Uckung

Table of ContentsI. IntroductionII. Controversies and IssuesIII. DAPs ConstitutionalityIV. DAPs Unconsitutionalitya. Appropriation should be left to the Legislativeb. Realignment of funds is allowed not creation of new projectc. Lack of practical use V. Conclusion

DISBURSEMENT ACCELARATION PROGRAM AND ITS CONSTITUTIONALITYMAERIAM S. UCKUNGIntroductionPeople become more attentive once they have been disturbed by an issue that affects their daily lives. As for Filipinos and the Philippine media, it is not only being attentive that should be done, it should be coupled with the desire to change the system which continously give massive economic prejudice and damage to the citizens of the country. In the height of the current issue involving Janet Lim-Napoles, certain legislators and the Pork Barrel, one particular disbursement project of the government had a share of the spotlight, this is what they call the Disbursement Accelaration Program or simply DAP.The Disbursement Accelaration Program is one of the innovations of the Aquino administration. The program was approved on October 12, 2011 by President Aquino after the recommendation of the Development Budget Coordination Committee or DBCC and certain members of the cabinet of the president. This DAP is conceptualized as a stimulus package under the Aquino administration designed to fast-track public spending and push economic growth. Based on the press release of the Deparment of Budget and Management[footnoteRef:2], the DAP would fund projects that are fast-disbursing. These projects includes public works, agriculture and agrarian reform, support to Local Government Units, housing, relocation and resettlement, railway rehabilitation, peace development and weather forecasting. [2: Official Gazette, Aquino government pursues 72.11B disbursement acceleration fundhttp://www.gov.ph/2011/10/12/aquino-goverment-pursues-p72-11-b-disbursement-acceleration-plan/, retrieved November 10, 2011]

The funds used in DAP, according to the Department of Budget and Management[footnoteRef:3], were sourced from savings generated by the government, the realignment of which is subject to the approval of the President; as well as the Unprogrammed Fund that can be tapped when government has windfall revenue collections, e.g., unexpected remittance of dividends from the GOCCs and Government Financial Institutions (GFIs), sale of government assets. [3: Department of Budget and Management, http://www.dbm.gov.ph/?page_id=7364 retrieved November 10, 2011, ]

The funds in the DAP amounted to P72.11 billion. Of the P72.11 billion, P37.92 billion will be released to national government agencies; P7.25-billion to LGUs; and P26.90 billion to government-owned or -controlled corporations (GOCCs).[footnoteRef:4] These were the amounts invested and disbursed by the government through the Disbursement Acceleration Program. [4: Official Gazette, Aquino government pursues 72.11B disbursement acceleration fundhttp://www.gov.ph/2011/10/12/aquino-goverment-pursues-p72-11-b-disbursement-acceleration-plan/, retrieved November 10, 2011]

Controversies and IssuesBack in 2011, there were no extravagant media and public attention to the Disbursement Acceleration Program. It was considered as one of the normal disbursements of the government during the said year. However, this year, 2013, due to the uprise of the Pork Barrel Scam, every disbursement of the government has been under the radar of the media and the public.In the middle of October this year, various media institutions released articles regarding the Disbursement Acceleration Program. These articles were trying to associate the DAP with the issue on the Priority Development Assurance Fund or commonly known as the pork barrel. Some would say that this is a way to associate the executive, particularly the president, to a case that has been haunting the legislators for the previous months. Allegedly, the funds of the DAP were misappropriated and were never used properly by the executive. In recent articles by the media, it has been said that around a third of the total funds were channelled to off-budget items.[footnoteRef:5] The huge amounts were spent on items and projects that cannot be found in the 2011 or 2012 General Appropriations Act of the Congress. Some of the items that were highly questionable includes purchases of additional trains for th MRT, budget for the Moro National Liberation Front and the Cordillera Peoples Liberation Army for the Pamana program and stimulus funds for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.[footnoteRef:6] [5: Inquirer http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/521823/13-of-dap-went-to-off-budget-items. Retrieved November 10, 2013] [6: Ibid. ]

It is ConstitutionalAfter days of being pressured by media, the government responded to the allegations of that the Disbursement Acceleration Fund by firmly stating that it is constitutional and that the executive, through the president, can appropriate the savings for projects that were stated in the said program funds.Particularly, the government raises many provisions of law that bring about to the constitutionality of the Disbursement Acceleration Funds. Spearheading the argument of the government is Paragraph 5 Section 25, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.Paragraph 5 Section 25, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution provides that:No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations;however, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissionsmay, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.Simply, the said constitutional provision is stating that the president or the executive can freely manipulate the savings of the government from the General Appropriations Act to any projects necessary for the country. The provision uses the term augment which means that the savings can be moved from one line item to another. Also, another basis for the validity of the Disbursement Acceleration Fund is Executive Order 292. Particularly the provisions on Section 49, Chapter 5, Book VI of the 1987 Administrative Code is used as support which provides:Savings in the appropriations provided in the General Appropriations Act may be used for the settlement of the following obligations incurred during a current fiscal year or previous fiscal years as may be approved by the Secretary in accordance with rules and procedures as may be approved by the PresidentThe said law provides a set of items to which the government or the executive may use any savings in the budget of the government. Particularly listed are obligations incurred during the fiscal year that are for salaries and benefits of any employees of the government. Last law used by the government to argue for its Constitutionality is the General Provisions on the Use of Savings under RA 10147 which provides:Sec. 59. Use of Savings. The President of the Philippines, the Senate President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Heads of Constitutional Commissions enjoying fiscal autonomy, and the Ombudsman are hereby authorized to augment any item in this Act from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.Sec. 61. Priority in the Use of Savings. In the use of savings, priority shall be given to the augmentation of the amounts set aside for compensation, year-end bonus and cash gift, retirement gratuity, terminal leave benefits, old-age pension of veterans and other personnel benefits authorized by law, and those expenditure items authorized in agency special provisions, in Section 16 and in other sections of the General Provisions of this Act.The above-provision gives the notion that the president or any of the listed official may freely manipulate the usage of any savings that can be realized in the General Appropriations Act. This also highlights a grant of power to the President to use and appropriate funds of the governement for projects.DAP is UnconstitutionalAlthough the executive firmly held to the constitutionality of the Disbursement Acceleration Funds, certain critics of the government and well-renowned political leaders expressed their disappointment and views to the unconstitutionality of the said act of the president. These people understands that although the intention of the Disbursement Acceleration Program is for the development of the country, certain technicalities have given rise to it being unconstitutional.[footnoteRef:7] [7: http%3a//www.abs-cbnnews.com/focus/10/02/13/diokno-bernas-dap-cant-fund-new-projects retrieved November 10, 2013.]

Particularly the major points that gives rise to the unconstitutionality of the Disbursement Acceleration Program includes the deprivation of the power to appropriate the funds, which should be left to the legislative, the usage of the funds for new projects and the funds should be used for the budget in the following year. The Power to Appropriate The power to appropriate is granted to the Legislature Any appropriations not done by the legislature is unconsitutionalRealignment not new projects Savings should be approprortioned to items in the General Appropriations Act Savings should be used to limited items as stated in the Administrative CodeSavings should be used for the next year Without any need or emergenct to use the funds, the government should not have hurried the spending of the savings Savings shall be appropriated in the next year More projects are in need of funds, not the new ones.

ConclusionThe intention of the Disbursement Acceleration Program is quite simple. It is to inject fundings to immediately improve the economy of the Philippines. The upside of the said program is that not only is economy improved by the disbursement of the funds but the projects would lead to improvement of the living conditions of the citizens of the country of the Philippines.However, a review of how it is done and implemented gives the people more questions than answers. It is unclear how there is supposed to be an improvement in the lives of people through the spendings done through the Disbursement Acceleration Program. It is also vague how people would benefit from billions spent on projects that cater to specific groups of people only.Although it is not yet sure whether the Disbursement Acceleration Program is a method of corruption or an intellectual form to launder money of the government, the people would like this program to be set in a straight line. Clearly, the people are tired of news of corruption. The people have grown old and weary of the never-ending tales of how a rich and powerful politician grabbed the money of the people and used it as his own. The people wants a government that can stand for the rights of the people and, instead of being run by greed, be one that supports the nation for its upliftment.The Disbursment Accelleration Program is clearly unconstitutional. It does not reflect the ideals that are projected to the people by the 1987 Philippine Constitution. It is one of the Executive Orders that have been understudied and have been misapplied by the current administration.The power to appropriate shall be left solely to the legistature. Although the said funds were borne out of savings, it does not give authority to the president and the executive to use and appropriate them. This violates the equality of power the is embodied in the 1987 Philippine Consitution.The act of the president of using the savings of the General Appropriations Act gives the people the notion that the president has full authority in all that is happening in the country and that the legislature is left with no choice but to follow. This perception violates the supposed to be check and balance that should be happening.This checks and balance is what the 1987 constitution is trying to embody. Without this, we will end into another dictatorship. One that is similar to the dark years of the country when one man, the president was controlling nearly everything.It is not a bad thing to be thinking of the improvement of the economy and society. It is not also bad to invest money to achieve this goal. However, the manner of investing is the one that should be considered and this has not be followed by the government.As stated earlier, realignment, simply, is putting the funds into another project. This project should be one that is already present and has already been budgetted. However, the current fundings do not address this.It is simply shown that the projects to which this funds were given were ones that are new and do not actually have been appropriated in the General Appropriations Act. It is clear that there was no realignment but a creation of new projects by the executive, which is not allowed by th rules.Clearly, the government have failed to follow the rules that they have given. The laws should be followed by the people and most especially, the govenrment, to ensure order and peace throughout society. Since the laws were not followed, the people have grown mad and that their anger cannot be really sustained.This issue is one that rose because of a whistleblower to the malfeasance of the members of the legislative body through the funds of that were supposed to be given to the people. The people have been distubed by the alleged thievery of the officials that they are studying the actions of the rest of the members of the government.The people have grown aware and have grown to be in intelect to the issues of government spending. It is not enough that the government say that it is valid or bring laws that say it is valid. They should let the people feel that it one that is valid and needed by the people of the country.In this case, there have been no showing of the importance and need for this spending. It is unclear how this funds would help the society or help economy. It is a challenge for a government to prove how this funds would uplift the depreciating conditions of the life the citizens of the nation.To end, let us cite the law that governs our country, the preamble of the 1987 Constitution which states that:We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society, and establish a Government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good, conserve and develop our patrimony, and secure to ourselves and our posterity, the blessings of independence and democracy under the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love, equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution.

The preamble, although not a source of right, gives us a vision of what the government of the Philippines should be. In summary the government should be one that embodies the following things. First, the embodiment of ideals of the people.The ideal government is one for the people, by the people and to the people. Just like the funds of the government, it should be for, by and to the people and not to the pockets of greedy politicians.Second, promotion of common good. Common good refers a blanket of improvement to the society. Equality in equity or having and giving every person in the country what is due to him. People should not be wealthy but others are starving because of them. The funds are not inteded for the government and the government officials personal consumption but for the consumption and the improvement of the people.The third one is the rule of law. The government officials, the president, the members of the congress and the judiciary are in the government for one thing, it is for enforcement of the rule of law. This should be one that should be contemplated by the government. It is not about the money or the wealth that should be the reason for them to be in office. It is about their concern to give the people of the Philippines the equality and equity through enforcement of the rule of law in every aspect of politics. It is not enough that people be aware of the happenings of in the country. It is not enough that the citizens listen and just argue of the concepts of corruption in their head and hearts. The people should stand up for their rights and bring peace to themselves.Corruption have been rampant through the years. There is no showing that its existence would come to and end or if there would be a decline on ts impact. But one thing should be erased. That is economic improvement should not be used as an escape route by the government to be able to manipulate the funds of the country and use it for themselves. As said by many political analyst, DAP, PDAF or pork barrel, whatever the name is, the one thing that they have in common is corruption. If this is not errased, people will still continue to express anger in the government. Therefore, it is only when corruption is gone that the people will revert their trust to the government.