271059/271347/E-02472/E-04036  Separate Concurring Opinion: Justice Japar B. Dimaampao — Official PDF

Separate Concurring Opinion 19 G.R. Nos. 271059, 271347, E-02472, and E-04036 On this score, the situation brought about by the first two triggers is similar to the Presidential Pork Barrel issue.resolved in Belgica in which no sufficient standard was given to adequately guide the Executive in its prioritization. The following exchange during the.oral arguments with amicus , curiµ,e Florencio Abad buttresses this postulation: · ASSOCIATE JUSTICE DIMAAMPAO: Good morning. You mentioned in your opening statement that in funding unprogrammed appropriations, reality forces forces three decisions namely: one; which appropriations will be funded; two, which vvill not be funded; and in what amounts. Given these three decisions, would you say that in light of too much discretion involved, unprogrruinned appropriations may partake of the nature of pork barrel? HON.ABAD: That's one of the consequences if this mechanism stays in the budget and we .do not know what else may happen. I said that point, Your Honors, because if you look at the fiscal condition of the country, the rule is we never really had excess collections of revenues or budget surpluses. In fact, as I earlier mentioned, there have been only four instances in our history where we had budget surpluses; and this was the time of Pn;sident Ramos in 1974, 1975, uhh, J 994; 1995, '96, '97. Arid on the average, it was only about 9 billion.pesos surplus. The last time we had excess collections of revenues was stillinthe '70s: Although there was a claim thatin 2024, we had excess.revenues,but that's ou°ly bec~use '3/e inciuded the cash extractions from PhiiHealth ru1d the PDIC, which increased 'the revenue. But thos.e are not really. strictly speaking, cannot be characterized as tax revenues. If there were instances in the past where excess collections were in fact certified by the Executive, it was inore because we did not, as Araullo now dictates us, we did riot look at stre~nis ·of revenues holistically, and we looked at them separately. That's.why; in mani instances, excess qf non~tax revenues was used as a trigger to activate the unprogran;imed fund, which is now no longer possible. But ·ass(i1ning that that's still possible; in case there is excess collections,· usually· it's not enough to fund aU of the unprogrammed appropriations expenditure authorized by Congress. So, what happens is post- enactment. A decision has to be nrnde as to which of the authorized expenditures should be. funded and to what extent, and which should not. And my' positfon; my contep.tion is that this is post-enactment and happening during, fhe period of budget execution, and therefore, that power is exercised not by Congress, which has exclusive jurisdiction to do that, but by the Executive. That's why l said, it creates confusion or a problem, Your Honor. . . • • ASSOCIATEJUSTICE DIMAAMPAO: Sir, in practice, who. makes these decisions? HON.ABAD: Well, under our Constitution, for exampie, during the period of budget enactment in the •enactment •of programmed appropriations, it is the