MARCOS SHOULD RESPECT SC RULING, NOT DEFEND UNCONSTITUTIONAL BUDGET PRACTICES

QUEZON CITY — The Center for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG) expresses serious concern over President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s directive for the Office of the Solicitor General to seek reconsideration of the Supreme Court ruling striking down unconstitutional provisions involving the national budget.

The Supreme Court declared the 2024 and 2025 General Appropriations Acts unconstitutional over congressional increases beyond the President’s recommended appropriations and also invalidated key provisions governing unprogrammed appropriations in the 2026 GAA. In the 2024 budget alone, Congress increased unprogrammed appropriations by ₱449.5 billion.

CenPEG Chair Prof. Roland G. Simbulan said the administration should view the ruling as an opportunity to strengthen transparency and constitutional accountability rather than defend excessive discretion over public funds.

“The President should respect the Supreme Court ruling rather than use government resources to defend budget practices already found to violate constitutional safeguards. Public funds are not a discretionary political reservoir. Every peso must be traceable, justified, and subject to public scrutiny,” Simbulan said.

CenPEG stresses that pork barrel given another name remains pork barrel if it reproduces the same system of discretionary control, political allocation, and weak public accountability. Changing the label of a fund does not cure practices that violate constitutional safeguards.

The Supreme Court already confronted this principle in the landmark 2013 Belgica v. Ochoa ruling, which struck down the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) and congressional pork-barrel provisions and practices that allowed legislators to exercise post-enactment control over public funds. Government cannot simply recreate mechanisms with substantially the same unconstitutional features under new names.

“Pork barrel cannot be constitutionally rehabilitated simply by changing its name. What matters is not what a fund is called, but who controls it, how it is allocated, when projects are identified, and whether meaningful safeguards against political discretion exist,” Simbulan stressed.

CenPEG clarifies that unprogrammed appropriations are not unconstitutional per se. The issue is whether their expansion, triggering, release, and expenditure comply with constitutional limits, fiscal discipline, transparency, and clearly defined safeguards.

At a time when Filipinos are demanding greater accountability for public resources, the administration should fully disclose and account for how unprogrammed funds were released and spent rather than resist constitutional safeguards against unchecked spending.

The national budget belongs to the people. Pork barrel by another name is still pork if it preserves the same discretionary practices. Constitutional limits must prevail over political discretion and executive convenience.

REFERENCE: Prof. Roland Simbulan, Chairperson, 09272493295.  For more information, please contact: Email: cenpeg.info@gmail.com | Phone: 09171141405 | Website: www.cenpeg.org