Court decisionSource checked
271059/271347/E-02472/E-04036 Concurring and Dissenting Opinion: Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh — Official PDF
271059/271347/E-02472/E-04036 — Promulgated October 7, 2026 · 2026 · Supreme Court 2026 / Separate opinion
Source checked. The source check identifies the document; it does not verify every transcribed word or its current legal effect. Recovered or scanned text may contain errors. Compare the wording and subsequent history with the linked legal source.
DIGITAL P. 8 / 37
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion 8 G.R. Nos. 271347, 278353,
E-02472 & E-04036
exactly if 80 percent will be realized or not. So. this is just a projection of
the future earnings of the government.
MR. DAVIDE: That is exactly the reason why Congress cannot go
beyond that because what may be collected of the expected revenues may
be only very much less than 100 percent.
MR. NATIVIDAD: So, will tl1e Committee be willing to consider
an amendment in due time?
MR. DA V!DE: Just to clarify tl1at requirement or that restriction on
the legislature, ~ould the Gentleman be willing to .accommodate any
proposal in that respect?
MR. NATIVIDAD: I cannot locate the specific section now. [ ... ]16
Commissioner Natividad pointed out that it has been the historical
practice under the 1935 Constitution that Congress cannot increase the level
of the appropriations that has been recommended for adoption by the Chief
Executive. Commissioner de los Reyes admitted that in the draft article no
such prohibition exists. However, upon clarification made by Commissioner
Davide, he pointed out that the draft article has taken into account such
scenario as he pointed out that the budget of receipts based on existing and
proposed sources of revenue cannot be exceeded by Congress.
Eventually, the Commissioners would agree to add a ne;w proviso
explicitly reviving the budget ceiling:
MR. DAVIDE: Madam President, this is t11e amendment of
Commissioner Natividad which t11e Committee has accepted. On t11e same
Section 25 (1) after Commissioner Monsod's amendment, add a new
sentence to read as follows: "THE CONGRESS MAY NOT INCREASE
THE APPRORIATIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PRESIDENT FOR
THE OPERATION OF THE GOVERNMENT AS SPECIFIED IN THE
BUDGET."
I do not think this would require any explanation because t11is is in
t11e 1935 Constitution.
THE PRESIDENT: Will t11e sponsor restate the proposed
amendment?
MR. DAVIDE: It reads: "THE CONGRESS MAY NOT
INCREASE THE APPROPRIATIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE
PRESIDENT FOR THE OPERATION OF THE GOVERNMENJ;', .AS
SPECIFIED IN THE BUDGET."
16 II RECORD,.CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION (July 22, 1986).
If your browser cannot display the PDF, use Download original. Original access follows the same document permissions.