Belmonte Vows 2015 GAA Complied with SC Ruling on Pork

(PNA) — Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. on Thursday said the House of Representatives will prove before the Supreme Court (SC) that the Php2.606-trillion 2015 General Appropriations Act (GAA) complied with its ruling against the use of pork barrel.

Belmonte said the leadership will comply with SC order directing the executive and the legislative branches of government to explain within 10 days allegations that certain provisions in the 2015 national budget resurrected the already outlawed Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) and the voided practices under the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).

“We will file our comment and comply with the order of the Supreme Court,” Belmonte said.

Belmonte insisted that the national budget this year complies with the Constitution and SC ruling, reiterating that the statement of Sen. Panfilo “Ping” Lacson that at least Php424 billion in lump-sum or discretionary funds were allocated in 11 of the 21 major line agencies under this year’s national budget is baseless and unfounded.

“Everything is in order and complies with the SC decision regarding national budget,” Belmonte pointed out.

Also ordered to file their comments on the petition by several anti-corruption groups, led by former national treasurer Leonor Briones, were Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa Jr. and Budget Secretary Florencio Abad for the executive branch; and Senate President Franklin Drilon.

Based on the petition were Sections 70 and 73 of the 2015 General Appropriations Act (GAA), including National Budget Circular 559 (NBC 559) and some provisions under the Special Purpose Fund.

According to Section 70 of the 2015 GAA, it defines savings as portions or balances of any unreleased appropriations in the budget law which have not been obligated, while Section 73 specifies the rules in the realignment of allotment classes and reprioritization of items in the appropriations.

But the SC did not issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) that would stop the executive department from implementing the challenged provisions in the 2015 national budget.

“Petitioners call on this Honorable Court to prevent the Legislative and the Executive from making the Constitution or the ruling in the Belgica or Araullo illusory. Whether it is through deceptive or creative schemes, the Executive and the Legislative branches should be prevented from doing indirectly what they cannot legally do directly,” the petition stated.

The Belgica and Araullo decisions pertain to the declaration of unconstitutionality of PDAF and certain practices under the DAP respectively.

In November, 2013, the SC declared PDAF unconstitutional, including all its previous forms in the budget.

The SC also directed prosecutorial agencies to “investigate and prosecute all government officials and/or private individuals for possible criminal offenses related to the irregular, improper, and/or unlawful disbursement of all funds under the pork barrel system.”

In July, 2014, the SC voided several practices under the DAP, particularly the withdrawal of unobligated allotments from implementing agencies and their use as savings prior to end of fiscal year as well as the cross-border transfers of savings of the executive to augment funds of agencies outside the department. (PNA) CTB/SFM