(Second of a Series)

Challenging the constitutionality of the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) are nine petitioners led by Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) in G.R. No. 209287, Augusto L. Syjuco Jr. in G.R. No. 209135, Manuelito R. Luna in G.R. No. 209136, Atty. Jose Malvar Villegas Jr. in G.R. No. 209155 and Philippine Constitution Association (Philconsa) in G.R. No. 209164. Also filing against the DAP were the Integrated Bar of the Philippines in G.R. No. 209260, Greco Antonio Beda B. Belgica and Bishop Reuben M. Abante in G.R. No 209442, Conferderation for Unity, Recognition and Advancement of Government Employees (COURAGE) in G.R. No. 209517 and the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC) in G.R. No. 209569. All these cases were filed against Pres. Pnoy, Budget Sec. Buth Abad and Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa. Is good faith a defense in claiming that the DAP did not violate Section 29(1) of Article VI of the 1987 Constitution, a provision of the fundamental law that firmly ordains that “no money shall be paid out of the treasury except in pursuance of an appropriation made by law”?

* * * * *

Here's a continuation of the Supreme Court decision last July 1, 2014 which was decided en banc and all the 15 justices of the High Tribunal voted in favor of it, among others: “In G.R. No. 209287 (Araullo), the petitioners brought to the Court's attention NBC No. 541 (Adoption of Operational Efficiency Measure – Withdrawal of Agencies' Unobligated Allotments as of June 30, 2012), alleging that NBC No. 541, which was issued to implement the DAP, directed the withdrawal of unobligated allotments as of June 30, 2012 of government agencies and offices with low levels of obligations, both for continuing and current allotments. In due time, the respondents filed their Consolidated Comment through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG)”.

* * * * *

“In its Consolidated Comment, the OSG raised the matter of unprogrammed funds in order to support its argument regarding the President's power to spend. During the oral arguments, the propriety of releasing un-programmed funds to support projects under the DAP was considerably discussed. The petitioners in G.R. No. 209287(Araullo) and G.R. No. 209442 (Belgica) dwelled on un-programmed funds in their respective memoranda. During the oral arguments held on November 19, 2013, the Court directed Sec. Abad to submit a list of savings brought under the DAP that had been sourced from (a) completed programs; (b) discontinued or abandoned programs; (c) unpaid appropriations for compensation; (d) a certified copy of the President's directive dated June 27, 2012 referred to in NBC No. 541; and (e) all circulars or orders issued in relation to the DAP”.

* * * * *

The decision of the Supreme Court in all the nine cases may be summarized in this wise:

On the procedural issue on whether or not Rule 65 of the Rules of Court are the proper remedies adopted by the petitioners which also included applications for the issuance of writs of preliminary prohibitory injunction or temporary restraining orders. Pres. Pnoy, Abad and Ochoa contended that there is no actual controversy that is ripe for adjudication in the absence of adverse claims between the parties, that the petitioners lacked legal standing to sue because no allegations were made to the effect that they had suffered any injury as a result of the adoption of the DAP and issuance of NBC No. 541, that their being taxpayers did not immediately confer upon the petitioners the legal standing to sue considering that the adoption and implementation of the DAP and the issuance of NBC No. 541 were not in the exercise of the taxing or spending power of Congress and that even if the petitioners had suffered injury, there were plain, speedy and adequate remedies in the ordinary course of law available to them, like assailing the regularity of the DAP and related issuances before the Commission on Audit (COA) or in the trial courts. (To be continued)

* * * * *

POSTSCRIPT: We noticed how Atty. Nuevas Tirol-Montes, acting president of the University of Bohol has started to transform the school grounds of the main campus to a greener one. This is quite an environmental undertaking while others keep on concreting and cementing the school grounds. Our salute to the UB acting president for this…. Fr. Simplicio Manigque officiated the blessing of our law office yesterday morning at the mezzanine floor of Manigque Bulding along M.H. del Pilar Street. We have been moving our law office into four different locations but still within M.H. del Pilar Street. Our first tenant was Dr. Simplicio “Bobong” Yap then we moved on to the Manigque Building now being managed by Fr. Simplicio “Sim” Manigque. We just transferred from the second floor to the mezzanine floor of the building. In building occupancy, it pays to stay in the lower ground. No one wanted to stay at the top.....There's more when we come back.