Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. 208566 November 19, 2013
GRECO ANTONIOUS BEA B. BE!GICA "OSE M. #I!!EGAS "R. "OSE !. GON$A!E$ REUBEN M.
ABANTE %&' (UINTIN PAREES SAN IEGO, Petitioners,
vs.
)ONORAB!E E*ECUTI#E SECRETAR+ PA(UITO N. OC)OA "R. SECRETAR+ O, BUGET AN
MANAGEMENT ,!ORENCIO B. ABA, NATIONA! TREASURER ROSA!IA #. E !EON SENATE O,
T)E P)I!IPPINES re-re.e&/e' b0 ,RAN1!IN M. RI!ON m 23. 4%-%43/0 %. SENATE PRESIENT %&'
)OUSE O, REPRESENTATI#ES re-re.e&/e' b0 ,E!ICIANO S. BE!MONTE, "R. 3& 23. 4%-%43/0 %.
SPEA1ER O, T)E )OUSE, Respondents.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
G.R. No. 208593
SOCIA! "USTICE SOCIET+ 6S"S7 PRESIENT SAMSON S. A!CANTARA, Petitioner,
vs.
)ONORAB!E ,RAN1!IN M. RI!ON 3& 23. 4%-%43/0 %. SENATE PRESIENT %&' )ONORAB!E
,E!ICIANO S. BE!MONTE, "R., 3& 23. 4%-%43/0 %. SPEA1ER O, T)E )OUSE O,
REPRESENTATI#ES, Respondents.
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
G.R. No. 209251
PERITO M. NEPOMUCENO, ,ormer M%0or8Bo%4, M%r3&'9:9e ,ormer Prov3&43%; Bo%r' Member
8Prov3&4e o< M%r3&'9:9e, Petitioner,
vs.
PRESIENT BENIGNO SIMEON C. A(UINO III= %&' SECRETAR+ ,!ORENCIO BUTC) ABA,
EPARTMENT O, BUGET AN MANAGEMENT, Respondents.
D E C ! " N
PER!AS8BERNABE, J.:
#Experience is the oracle of truth.#1
-$a%es Madison
Before the Court are consolidated petitions2 ta&en under Rule '( of the Rules of Court, all of )hich assail the
constitutionalit* of the Por& Barrel !*ste%. Due to the co%plexit* of the sub+ect %atter, the Court shall heretofore
discuss the s*ste%,s conceptual underpinnin-s before detailin- the particulars of the constitutional challen-e.
.he /acts
. Por& Barrel0 1eneral Concept.
#Por& Barrel# is political parlance of A%erican -En-lish ori-in.3 2istoricall*, its usa-e %a* be traced to the
de-radin- ritual of rollin- out a barrel stuffed )ith por& to a %ultitude of blac& slaves )ho )ould cast their
fa%ished bodies into the porcine feast to assua-e their hun-er )ith %orsels co%in- fro% the -enerosit* of
their )ell-fed %aster.4 .his practice )as later co%pared to the actions of A%erican le-islators in tr*in- to
direct federal bud-ets in favor of their districts.5 3hile the advent of refri-eration has %ade the actual por&
barrel obsolete, it persists in reference to political bills that #brin- ho%e the bacon# to a le-islator,s district
and constituents.6 n a %ore technical sense, #Por& Barrel# refers to an appropriation of -overn%ent spendin-
%eant for locali4ed pro+ects and secured solel* or pri%aril* to brin- %one* to a representative5s
district.7!o%e scholars on the sub+ect further use it to refer to le-islative control of local appropriations.8
n the Philippines, #Por& Barrel# has been co%%onl* referred to as lu%p-su%, discretionar* funds of
Me%bers of the 6e-islature,9 althou-h, as )ill be later discussed, its usa-e )ould evolve in reference to
certain funds of the Executive.
. 2istor* of Con-ressional Por& Barrel in the Philippines.
A. Pre-Martial 6a) Era 789::-89;:<.
Act =>??,10 or the Public 3or&s Act of 89::, is considered11 as the earliest for% of
#Con-ressional Por& Barrel# in the Philippines since the utili4ation of the funds appropriated
therein )ere sub+ected to post-enact%ent le-islator approval. Particularl*, in the area of fund
release, !ection =12 provides that the su%s appropriated for certain public )or&s
pro+ects13 #shall be distributed x x x sub+ect to the approval of a +oint co%%ittee elected b* the
!enate and the 2ouse of Representatives. #.he co%%ittee fro% each 2ouse %a* also authori4e
one of its %e%bers to approve the distribution %ade b* the !ecretar* of Co%%erce and
Co%%unications.#14 Also, in the area of fund reali-n%ent, the sa%e section provides that the
said secretar*, #)ith the approval of said +oint co%%ittee, or of the authori4ed %e%bers thereof,
%a*, for the purposes of said distribution, transfer unexpended portions of an* ite% of
appropriation under this Act to an* other ite% hereunder.#
n 89(>, it has been docu%ented15 that post-enact%ent le-islator participation broadened fro%
the areas of fund release and reali-n%ent to the area of pro+ect identification. Durin- that *ear,
the %echanics of the public )or&s act )as %odified to the extent that the discretion of choosin-
pro+ects )as transferred fro% the !ecretar* of Co%%erce and Co%%unications to le-islators.
#/or the first ti%e, the la) carried a list of pro+ects selected b* Me%bers of Con-ress, the*
,bein- the representatives of the people, either on their o)n account or b* consultation )ith
local officials or civil leaders.,#16 Durin- this period, the por& barrel process co%%enced )ith
local -overn%ent councils, civil -roups, and individuals appealin- to Con-ress%en or !enators
for pro+ects. Petitions that )ere acco%%odated for%ed part of a le-islator,s allocation, and the
a%ount each le-islator )ould eventuall* -et is deter%ined in a caucus convened b* the %a+orit*.
.he a%ount )as then inte-rated into the ad%inistration bill prepared b* the Depart%ent of
Public 3or&s and Co%%unications. .hereafter, the !enate and the 2ouse of Representatives
added their o)n provisions to the bill until it )as si-ned into la) b* the President @ the Public
3or&s Act.17 n the 89'>,s, ho)ever, por& barrel le-islation reportedl* ceased in vie) of the
stale%ate bet)een the 2ouse of Representatives and the !enate.18
B. Martial 6a) Era 789;:-89A'<.
3hile the previous# Con-ressional Por& Barrel# )as apparentl* discontinued in 89;: after
Martial 6a) )as declared, an era )hen #one %an controlled the le-islature,#19 the reprieve )as
onl* te%porar*. B* 89A:, the Batasan- Pa%bansa had alread* introduced a ne) ite% in the
1eneral Appropriations Act 71AA< called the# !upport for 6ocal Develop%ent Pro+ects#
7!6DP< under the article on #National Aid to 6ocal 1overn%ent Bnits#. Based on reports, 20 it
)as under the !6DP that the practice of -ivin- lu%p-su% allocations to individual le-islators
be-an, )ith each asse%bl*%an receivin- P(>>,>>>.>>. .hereafter, asse%bl*%en )ould
co%%unicate their pro+ect preferences to the Ministr* of Bud-et and Mana-e%ent for approval.
.hen, the said %inistr* )ould release the allocation papers to the Ministr* of 6ocal
1overn%ents, )hich )ould, in turn, issue the chec&s to the cit* or %unicipal treasurers in the
asse%bl*%an,s localit*. t has been further reported that #Con-ressional Por& Barrel# pro+ects
under the !6DP also be-an to cover not onl* public )or&s pro+ects, or so- called #hard
pro+ects#, but also #soft pro+ects#,21 or non-public )or&s pro+ects such as those )hich )ould fall
under the cate-ories of, a%on- others, education, health and livelihood.22
C. Post-Martial 6a) Era0
Cora4on Co+uan-co ACuino Ad%inistration 789A'-899:<.
After the ED!A People Po)er Revolution in 89A' and the restoration of Philippine de%ocrac*,
#Con-ressional Por& Barrel# )as revived in the for% of the #Mindanao Develop%ent /und# and
the #Disa*as Develop%ent /und# )hich )ere created )ith lu%p-su% appropriations of P?A>
Million and P:?> Million, respectivel*, for the fundin- of develop%ent pro+ects in the
Mindanao and Disa*as areas in 89A9. t has been docu%ented23 that the cla%or raised b* the
!enators and the 6u4on le-islators for a si%ilar fundin-, pro%pted the creation of the
#Countr*)ide Develop%ent /und# 7CD/< )hich )as inte-rated into the 899> 1AA24 )ith an
initial fundin- ofP:.= Billion to cover #s%all local infrastructure and other priorit* co%%unit*
pro+ects.#
Bnder the 1AAs for the *ears 8998 and 899:,25 CD/ funds )ere, )ith the approval of the
President, to be released directl* to the i%ple%entin- a-encies but #sub+ect to the sub%ission of
the reCuired list of pro+ects and activities.#Althou-h the 1AAs fro% 899> to 899: )ere silent as
to the a%ounts of allocations of the individual le-islators, as )ell as their participation in the
identification of pro+ects, it has been reported26 that b* 899:, Representatives )ere
receivin-P8:.( Million each in CD/ funds, )hile !enators )ere receivin- P8A Million each,
)ithout an* li%itation or Cualification, and that the* could identif* an* &ind of pro+ect, fro%
hard or infrastructure pro+ects such as roads, brid-es, and buildin-s to #soft pro+ects# such as
textboo&s, %edicines, and scholarships.27
D. /idel Dalde4 Ra%os 7Ra%os< Ad%inistration 7899:-899A<.
.he follo)in- *ear, or in 899=,28 the 1AA explicitl* stated that the release of CD/ funds )as to
be %ade upon the sub%ission of the list of pro+ects and activities identified b*, a%on- others,
individual le-islators. /or the first ti%e, the 899= CD/ Article included an allocation for the
Dice-President.29 As such, Representatives )ere allocated P8:.( Million each in CD/ funds,
!enators, P8A Million each, and the Dice-President, P:> Million.
n 899?,30 899(,31 and 899',32 the 1AAs contained the sa%e provisions on pro+ect
identification and fund release as found in the 899= CD/ Article. n addition, ho)ever, the
Depart%ent of Bud-et and Mana-e%ent 7DBM< )as directed to sub%it reports to the !enate
Co%%ittee on /inance and the 2ouse Co%%ittee on Appropriations on the releases %ade fro%
the funds.33
Bnder the 899;34 CD/ Article, Me%bers of Con-ress and the Dice-President, in consultation
)ith the i%ple%entin- a-enc* concerned, )ere directed to sub%it to the DBM the list of (>E of
pro+ects to be funded fro% their respective CD/ allocations )hich shall be dul* endorsed b* 7a<
the !enate President and the Chair%an of the Co%%ittee on /inance, in the case of the !enate,
and 7b< the !pea&er of the 2ouse of Representatives and the Chair%an of the Co%%ittee on
Appropriations, in the case of the 2ouse of RepresentativesF )hile the list for the re%ainin-
(>E )as to be sub%itted )ithin six 7'< %onths thereafter. .he sa%e article also stated that the
pro+ect list, )hich )ould be published b* the DBM,35 #shall be the basis for the release of
funds# and that #no funds appropriated herein shall be disbursed for pro+ects not included in the
list herein reCuired.#
.he follo)in- *ear, or in 899A,36 the fore-oin- provisions re-ardin- the reCuired lists and
endorse%ents )ere reproduced, except that the publication of the pro+ect list )as no lon-er
reCuired as the list itself sufficed for the release of CD/ /unds.
.he CD/ )as not, ho)ever, the lone for% of #Con-ressional Por& Barrel# at that ti%e. "ther
for%s of #Con-ressional Por& Barrel# )ere reportedl* fashioned and inserted into the 1AA
7called #Con-ressional nsertions# or #Cs#< in order to perpetuate the ad %inistration,s political
a-enda.37 t has been articulated that since Cs #for%ed part and parcel of the bud-ets of
executive depart%ents, the* )ere not easil* identifiable and )ere thus harder to %onitor.#
Nonetheless, the la)%a&ers the%selves as )ell as the finance and bud-et officials of the
i%ple%entin- a-encies, as )ell as the DBM, purportedl* &ne) about the insertions.38 Exa%ples
of these Cs are the Depart%ent of Education 7DepEd< !chool Buildin- /und, the Con-ressional
nitiative Allocations, the Public 3or&s /und, the El NiGo /und, and the Povert* Alleviation
/und.39 .he allocations for the !chool Buildin- /und, particularl*, Hshall be %ade upon prior
consultation )ith the representative of the le-islative district concerned.I40 !i%ilarl*, the
le-islators had the po)er to direct ho), )here and )hen these appropriations )ere to be spent.41
E. $oseph E+ercito Estrada 7Estrada< Ad%inistration 7899A-:>>8<.
n 8999,42 the CD/ )as re%oved in the 1AA and replaced b* three 7=< separate for%s of Cs,
na%el*, the #/ood !ecurit* Pro-ra% /und,#43 the #6in-ap Para !a Mahihirap Pro-ra%
/und,#44and the #RuralJBrban Develop%ent nfrastructure Pro-ra% /und,#45 all of )hich
contained a special provision reCuirin- #prior consultation# )ith the Me%ber s of Con-ress for
the release of the funds.
t )as in the *ear :>>>46 that the #Priorit* Develop%ent Assistance /und# 7PDA/< appeared in
the 1AA. .he reCuire%ent of #prior consultation )ith the respective Representative of the
District# before PDA/ funds )ere directl* released to the i%ple%entin- a-enc* concerned )as
explicitl* stated in the :>>> PDA/ Article. Moreover, reali-n%ent of funds to an* expense
cate-or* )as expressl* allo)ed, )ith the sole condition that no a%ount shall be used to fund
personal services and other personnel benefits.47 .he succeedin- PDA/ provisions re%ained the
sa%e in vie) of the re-enact%ent48 of the :>>> 1AA for the *ear :>>8.
/. 1loria Macapa-al-Arro*o 7Arro*o< Ad%inistration 7:>>8-:>8><.
.he :>>:49 PDA/ Article )as brief and strai-htfor)ard as it %erel* contained a sin-le special
provision orderin- the release of the funds directl* to the i%ple%entin- a-enc* or local
-overn%ent unit concerned, )ithout further Cualifications. .he follo)in- *ear, :>>=,50 the sa%e
sin-le provision )as present, )ith si%pl* an expansion of purpose and express authorit* to
reali-n. Nevertheless, the provisions in the :>>= bud-ets of the Depart%ent of Public 3or&s and
2i-h)a*s51 7DP32< and the DepEd52 reCuired prior consultation )ith Me%bers of Con-ress
on the aspects of i%ple%entation dele-ation and pro+ect list sub%ission, respectivel*. n :>>?,
the :>>= 1AA )as re-enacted.53
n :>>(,54 the PDA/ Article provided that the PDA/ shall be used #to fund priorit* pro-ra%s
and pro+ects under the ten point a-enda of the national -overn%ent and shall be released directl*
to the i%ple%entin- a-encies.# t also introduced the pro-ra% %enu concept,55 )hich is
essentiall* a list of -eneral pro-ra%s and i%ple%entin- a-encies fro% )hich a particular PDA/
pro+ect %a* be subseCuentl* chosen b* the identif*in- authorit*. .he :>>( 1AA )as re-
enacted56 in :>>' and hence, operated on the sa%e bases. n si%ilar re-ard, the pro-ra% %enu
concept )as consistentl* inte-rated into the :>>;,57 :>>A,58 :>>9,59 and :>8>60 1AAs.
.extuall*, the PDA/ Articles fro% :>>: to :>8> )ere silent )ith respect to the specific a%ounts
allocated for the individual le-islators, as )ell as their participation in the proposal and
identification of PDA/ pro+ects to be funded. n contrast to the PDA/ Articles, ho)ever, the
provisions under the DepEd !chool Buildin- Pro-ra% and the DP32 bud-et, si%ilar to its
predecessors, explicitl* reCuired prior consultation )ith the concerned Me%ber of
Con-ress61anent certain aspects of pro+ect i%ple%entation.
!i-nificantl*, it )as durin- this era that provisions )hich allo)ed for%al participation of non-
-overn%ental or-ani4ations 7N1"< in the i%ple%entation of -overn%ent pro+ects )ere
introduced. n the !upple%ental Bud-et for :>>', )ith respect to the appropriation for school
buildin-s, N1"s )ere, b* la), encoura-ed to participate. /or such purpose, the la) stated that
#the a%ount of at least P:(> Million of the P(>> Million allotted for the construction and
co%pletion of school buildin-s shall be %ade available to N1"s includin- the /ederation of
/ilipino-Chinese Cha%bers of Co%%erce and ndustr*, nc. for its #"peration Barrio !chool#
pro-ra%, )ith capabilit* and proven trac& records in the construction of public school buildin-s
x x x.#62 .he sa%e allocation )as %ade available to N1"s in the :>>; and :>>9 1AAs under
the DepEd Bud-et.63 Also, it )as in :>>; that the 1overn%ent Procure%ent Polic*
Board64 71PPB< issued Resolution No. 8:-:>>; dated $une :9, :>>; 71PPB Resolution 8:-
:>>;<, a%endin- the i%ple%entin- rules and re-ulations65 of RA 98A?,66 the 1overn%ent
Procure%ent Refor% Act, to include, as a for% of ne-otiated procure%ent,67 the procedure
)hereb* the Procurin- Entit*687the i%ple%entin- a-enc*< %a* enter into a %e%orandu% of
a-ree%ent )ith an N1", provided that #an appropriation la) or ordinance ear%ar&s an a%ount
to be specificall* contracted out to N1"s.#69
1. Present Ad%inistration 7:>8>-Present<.
Differin- fro% previous PDA/ Articles but si%ilar to the CD/ Articles, the :>8870 PDA/
Article included an express state%ent on lu%p-su% a%ounts allocated for individual le-islators
and the Dice-President0 Representatives )ere -iven P;> Million each, bro&en do)n into P?>
Million for #hard pro+ects# and P=> Million for #soft pro+ects#F )hile P:>> Million )as -iven to
each !enator as )ell as the Dice-President, )ith a P8>> Million allocation each for #hard# and
#soft pro+ects.# 6i&e)ise, a provision on reali-n%ent of funds )as included, but )ith the
Cualification that it %a* be allo)ed onl* once. .he sa%e provision also allo)ed the !ecretaries
of Education, 2ealth, !ocial 3elfare and Develop%ent, nterior and 6ocal 1overn%ent,
Environ%ent and Natural Resources, Ener-*, and Public 3or&s and 2i-h)a*s to reali-n PDA/
/unds, )ith the further conditions that0 7a< reali-n%ent is )ithin the sa%e i%ple%entin- unit
and sa%e pro+ect cate-or* as the ori-inal pro+ect, for infrastructure pro+ectsF 7b< allot%ent
released has not *et been obli-ated for the ori-inal scope of )or&, and 7c< the reCuest for
reali-n%ent is )ith the concurrence of the le-islator concerned.71
n the :>8:72 and :>8=73 PDA/ Articles, it is stated that the #identification of pro+ects andJor
desi-nation of beneficiaries shall confor% to the priorit* list, standard or desi-n prepared b*
each i%ple%entin- a-enc* 7priorit* list reCuire%ent< x x x.# 2o)ever, as practiced, it )ould
still be the individual le-islator )ho )ould choose and identif* the pro+ect fro% the said priorit*
list.74
Provisions on le-islator allocations75 as )ell as fund reali-n%ent76 )ere included in the :>8:
and :>8= PDA/ ArticlesF but the allocation for the Dice-President, )hich )as pe--ed at P:>>
Million in the :>88 1AA, had been deleted. n addition, the :>8= PDA/ Article no) allo)ed
61Bs to be identified as i%ple%entin- a-encies if the* have the technical capabilit* to
i%ple%ent the pro+ects.77 6e-islators )ere also allo)ed to identif* pro-ra%sJpro+ects, except for
assistance to indi-ent patients and scholarships, outside of his le-islative district provided that
he secures the )ritten concurrence of the le-islator of the intended outside-district, endorsed b*
the !pea&er of the 2ouse.78 /inall*, an* reali-n%ent of PDA/ funds, %odification and revision
of pro+ect identification, as )ell as reCuests for release of funds, )ere all reCuired to be
favorabl* endorsed b* the 2ouse Co%%ittee on Appropriations and the !enate Co%%ittee on
/inance, as the case %a* be.79
. 2istor* of Presidential Por& Barrel in the Philippines.
3hile the ter% #Por& Barrel# has been t*picall* associated )ith lu%p-su%, discretionar* funds of Me%bers
of Con-ress, the present cases and the recent controversies on the %atter have, ho)ever, sho)n that the
ter%,s usa-e has expanded to include certain funds of the President such as the Mala%pa*a /unds and the
Presidential !ocial /und.
"n the one hand, the Mala%pa*a /unds )as created as a special fund under !ection A80 of Presidential
Decree No. 7PD< 98>,81 issued b* then President /erdinand E. Marcos 7Marcos< on March ::, 89;'. n
enactin- the said la), Marcos reco-ni4ed the need to set up a special fund to help intensif*, stren-then, and
consolidate -overn%ent efforts relatin- to the exploration, exploitation, and develop%ent of indi-enous
ener-* resources vital to econo%ic -ro)th.82 Due to the ener-*-related activities of the -overn%ent in the
Mala%pa*a natural -as field in Pala)an, or the #Mala%pa*a Deep 3ater 1as-to-Po)er Pro+ect#,83 the special
fund created under PD 98> has been currentl* labeled as Mala%pa*a /unds.
"n the other hand the Presidential !ocial /und )as created under !ection 8:, .itle D84 of PD 8A'9,85 or the
Charter of the Philippine A%use%ent and 1a%in- Corporation 7PA1C"R<. PD 8A'9 )as si%ilarl* issued b*
Marcos on $ul* 88, 89A=. More than t)o 7:< *ears after, he a%ended PD 8A'9 and accordin-l* issued PD
899= on "ctober =8, 89A(,86 a%endin- !ection 8:87 of the for%er la). As it stands, the Presidential !ocial
/und has been described as a special fundin- facilit* %ana-ed and ad%inistered b* the Presidential
Mana-e%ent !taff throu-h )hich the President provides direct assistance to priorit* pro-ra%s and pro+ects
not funded under the re-ular bud-et. t is sourced fro% the share of the -overn%ent in the a--re-ate -ross
earnin-s of PA1C"R.88
D. Controversies in the Philippines.
"ver the decades, #por&# funds in the Philippines have increased tre%endousl*,89 o)in- in no s%all part to
previous Presidents )ho reportedl* used the #Por& Barrel# in order to -ain con-ressional support.90 t )as in
899' )hen the first controvers* surroundin- the #Por& Barrel# erupted. /or%er Mari&ina Cit* Representative
Ro%eo Canda4o 7Canda4o<, then an anon*%ous source, #ble) the lid on the hu-e su%s of -overn%ent %one*
that re-ularl* )ent into the poc&ets of le-islators in the for% of &ic&bac&s.#91 2e said that #the &ic&bac&s
)ere ,!"P, 7standard operatin- procedure< a%on- le-islators and ran-ed fro% a lo) 89 percent to a hi-h (:
percent of the cost of each pro+ect, )hich could be an*thin- fro% dred-in-, rip rappin-, sphaltin-, concretin-,
and construction of school buildin-s.#92 #"ther sources of &ic&bac&s that Canda4o identified )ere public
funds intended for %edicines and textboo&s. A fe) da*s later, the tale of the %one* trail beca%e the banner
stor* of the Philippine Dail* nCuirer issue of Au-ust 8=, 899', acco%panied b* an illustration of a roasted
pi-.#93 #.he publication of the stories, includin- those about con-ressional initiative allocations of certain
la)%a&ers, includin- P=.' Billion for a Con-ress%an, spar&ed public outra-e.#94
.hereafter, or in :>>?, several concerned citi4ens sou-ht the nullification of the PDA/ as enacted in the :>>?
1AA for bein- unconstitutional. Bnfortunatel*, for lac& of #an* pertinent evidentiar* support that ille-al
%isuse of PDA/ in the for% of &ic&bac&s has beco%e a co%%on exercise of unscrupulous Me%bers of
Con-ress,# the petition )as dis%issed.95
Recentl*, or in $ul* of the present *ear, the National Bureau of nvesti-ation 7NB< be-an its probe into
alle-ations that #the -overn%ent has been defrauded of so%e P8> Billion over the past 8> *ears b* a
s*ndicate usin- funds fro% the por& barrel of la)%a&ers and various -overn%ent a-encies for scores of -host
pro+ects.#96 .he investi-ation )as spa)ned b* s)orn affidavits of six 7'< )histle-blo)ers )ho declared that
$6N Corporation @ #$6N# standin- for $anet 6i% Napoles 7Napoles< @ had s)indled billions of pesos fro% the
public coffers for #-host pro+ects# usin- no fe)er than :> du%%* N1"s for an entire decade. 3hile the
N1"s )ere supposedl* the ulti%ate recipients of PDA/ funds, the )histle-blo)ers declared that the %one*
)as diverted into Napoles, private accounts.97 .hus, after its investi-ation on the Napoles controvers*,
cri%inal co%plaints )ere filed before the "ffice of the "%buds%an, char-in- five 7(< la)%a&ers for Plunder,
and three 7=< other la)%a&ers for Malversation, Direct Briber*, and Diolation of the Anti-1raft and Corrupt
Practices Act. Also reco%%ended to be char-ed in the co%plaints are so%e of the la)%a&ers, chiefs -of-staff
or representatives, the heads and other officials of three 7=< i%ple%entin- a-encies, and the several presidents
of the N1"s set up b* Napoles.98
"n Au-ust 8', :>8=, the Co%%ission on Audit 7CoA< released the results of a three-*ear audit
investi-ation99coverin- the use of le-islators5 PDA/ fro% :>>; to :>>9, or durin- the last three 7=< *ears of
the Arro*o ad%inistration. .he purpose of the audit )as to deter%ine the propriet* of releases of funds under
PDA/ and the Darious nfrastructures includin- 6ocal Pro+ects 7D6P<100 b* the DBM, the application of
these funds and the i%ple%entation of pro+ects b* the appropriate i%ple%entin- a-encies and several
-overn%ent-o)ned-and-controlled corporations 71"CCs<.101 .he total releases covered b* the audit
a%ounted to PA.=;? Billion in PDA/ and P=:.''? Billion in D6P, representin- (AE and =:E, respectivel*,
of the total PDA/ and D6P releases that )ere found to have been %ade nation)ide durin- the audit
period.102 Accordin-l*, the Co A,s findin-s contained in its Report No. :>8:->= 7CoA Report<, entitled
#Priorit* Develop%ent Assistance /und 7PDA/< and Darious nfrastructures includin- 6ocal Pro+ects
7D6P<,# )ere %ade public, the hi-hli-hts of )hich are as follo)s0103
K A%ounts released for pro+ects identified b* a considerable nu%ber of le-islators si-nificantl*
exceeded their respective allocations.
K A%ounts )ere released for pro+ects outside of le-islative districts of sponsorin- %e%bers of the
6o)er 2ouse.
K .otal D6P releases for the period exceeded the total a%ount appropriated under the :>>; to :>>9
1AAs.
K nfrastructure pro+ects )ere constructed on private lots )ithout these havin- been turned over to
the -overn%ent.
K !i-nificant a%ounts )ere released to i%ple%entin- a-encies )ithout the latter,s endorse%ent and
)ithout considerin- their %andated functions, ad%inistrative and technical capabilities to i%ple%ent
pro+ects.
K %ple%entation of %ost livelihood pro+ects )as not underta&en b* the i%ple%entin- a-encies
the%selves but b* N1"s endorsed b* the proponent le-islators to )hich the /unds )ere transferred.
K .he funds )ere transferred to the N1"s in spite of the absence of an* appropriation la) or
ordinance.
K !election of the N1"s )ere not co%pliant )ith la) and re-ulations.
K Ei-ht*-.)o 7A:< N1"s entrusted )ith i%ple%entation of seven hundred sevent* t)o 7;;:<
pro+ects a%ount to P'.8(' Billion )ere either found Cuestionable, or sub%itted CuestionableJspurious
docu%ents, or failed to liCuidate in )hole or in part their utili4ation of the /unds.
K Procure%ent b* the N1"s, as )ell as so%e i%ple%entin- a-encies, of -oods and services
reportedl* used in the pro+ects )ere not co%pliant )ith la).
As for the #Presidential Por& Barrel#, )histle-blo)ers alle-ed that# at least P9>> Million fro% ro*alties in the
operation of the Mala%pa*a -as pro+ect off Pala)an province intended for a-rarian refor% beneficiaries has
-one into a du%%* N1".#104 Accordin- to incu%bent CoA Chairperson Maria 1racia Pulido .an 7CoA
Chairperson<, the CoA is, as of this )ritin-, in the process of preparin- #one consolidated report# on the
Mala%pa*a /unds.105
D. .he Procedural Antecedents.
!purred in lar-e part b* the findin-s contained in the CoA Report and the Napoles controvers*, several
petitions )ere lod-ed before the Court si%ilarl* see&in- that the #Por& Barrel !*ste%# be declared
unconstitutional. .o recount, the relevant procedural antecedents in these cases are as follo)s0
"n Au-ust :A, :>8=, petitioner !a%son !. Alcantara 7Alcantara<, President of the !ocial $ustice !ociet*, filed a
Petition for Prohibition of even date under Rule '( of the Rules of Court 7Alcantara Petition<, see&in- that the #Por&
Barrel !*ste%# be declared unconstitutional, and a )rit of prohibition be issued per%anentl* restrainin- respondents
/ran&lin M. Drilon and /eliciano !. Bel%onte, $r., in their respective capacities as the incu%bent !enate President and
!pea&er of the 2ouse of Representatives, fro% further ta&in- an* steps to enact le-islation appropriatin- funds for the
#Por& Barrel !*ste%,# in )hatever for% and b* )hatever na%e it %a* be called, and fro% approvin- further releases
pursuant thereto.106 .he Alcantara Petition )as doc&eted as 1.R. No. :>A?9=.
"n !epte%ber =, :>8=, petitioners 1reco Antonious Beda B. Bel-ica, $ose 6. 1on4ale4, Reuben M. Abante, Luintin
Paredes !an Die-o 7Bel-ica, et al.<, and $ose M. Dille-as, $r. 7Dille-as< filed an Br-ent Petition /or Certiorari and
Prohibition 3ith Pra*er /or .he %%ediate ssuance of .e%porar* Restrainin- "rder 7.R"< andJor 3rit of
Preli%inar* n+unction dated Au-ust :;, :>8= under Rule '( of the Rules of Court 7Bel-ica Petition<, see&in- that the
annual #Por& Barrel !*ste%,# presentl* e%bodied in the provisions of the 1AA of :>8= )hich provided for the :>8=
PDA/, and the Executive,s lu%p-su%, discretionar* funds, such as the Mala%pa*a /unds and the Presidential !ocial
/und,107 be declared unconstitutional and null and void for bein- acts constitutin- -rave abuse of discretion. Also,
the* pra* that the Court issue a .R" a-ainst respondents PaCuito N. "choa, $r., /lorencio B. Abad 7!ecretar* Abad<
and Rosalia D. De 6eon, in their respective capacities as the incu%bent Executive !ecretar*, !ecretar* of the
Depart%ent of Bud-et and Mana-e%ent 7DBM<, and National .reasurer, or their a-ents, for the% to i%%ediatel*
cease an* expenditure under the aforesaid funds. /urther, the* pra* that the Court order the fore-oin- respondents to
release to the CoA and to the public0 7a< #the co%plete scheduleJlist of le-islators )ho have availed of their PDA/ and
D6P fro% the *ears :>>= to :>8=, specif*in- the use of the funds, the pro+ect or activit* and the recipient entities or
individuals, and all pertinent data thereto#F and 7b< #the use of the Executive,s lu%p-su%, discretionar* funds,
includin- the proceeds fro% the x x x Mala%pa*a /unds and re%ittances fro% the PA1C"R x x x fro% :>>= to :>8=,
specif*in- the x x x pro+ect or activit* and the recipient entities or individuals, and all pertinent data thereto.#108 Also,
the* pra* for the #inclusion in bud-etar* deliberations )ith the Con-ress of all presentl* off-bud-et, lu%p-su%,
discretionar* funds includin-, but not li%ited to, proceeds fro% the Mala%pa*a /unds and re%ittances fro% the
PA1C"R.#109 .he Bel-ica Petition )as doc&eted as 1.R. No. :>A(''.110
6astl*, on !epte%ber (, :>8=, petitioner Pedrito M. Nepo%uceno 7Nepo%uceno<, filed a Petition dated Au-ust :=,
:>8: 7Nepo%uceno Petition<, see&in- that the PDA/ be declared unconstitutional, and a cease and desist order be
issued restrainin- President Beni-no !i%eon !. ACuino 7President ACuino< and !ecretar* Abad fro% releasin-
such funds to Me%bers of Con-ress and, instead, allo) their release to fund priorit* pro+ects identified and approved
b* the 6ocal Develop%ent Councils in consultation )ith the executive depart%ents, such as the DP32, the
Depart%ent of .ouris%, the Depart%ent of 2ealth, the Depart%ent of .ransportation, and Co%%unication and the
National Econo%ic Develop%ent Authorit*.111 .he Nepo%uceno Petition )as doc&eted as BDM-8?9(8.112
"n !epte%ber 8>, :>8=, the Court issued a Resolution of even date 7a< consolidatin- all casesF 7b< reCuirin- public
respondents to co%%ent on the consolidated petitionsF 7c< issuin- a .R" 7!epte%ber 8>, :>8= .R"< en+oinin- the
DBM, National .reasurer, the Executive !ecretar*, or an* of the persons actin- under their authorit* fro% releasin-
78< the re%ainin- PDA/ allocated to Me%bers of Con-ress under the 1AA of :>8=, and 7:< Mala%pa*a /unds under
the phrase #for such other purposes as %a* be hereafter directed b* the President# pursuant to !ection A of PD 98> but
not for the purpose of #financin- ener-* resource develop%ent and exploitation pro-ra%s and pro+ects of the
-overn%ent under the sa%e provisionF and 7d< settin- the consolidated cases for "ral Ar-u%ents on "ctober A,
:>8=.
"n !epte%ber :=, :>8=, the "ffice of the !olicitor 1eneral 7"!1< filed a Consolidated Co%%ent 7Co%%ent< of even
date before the Court, see&in- the liftin-, or in the alternative, the partial liftin- )ith respect to educational and
%edical assistance purposes, of the Court,s !epte%ber 8>, :>8= .R", and that the consolidated petitions be dis%issed
for lac& of %erit.113
"n !epte%ber :?, :>8=, the Court issued a Resolution of even date directin- petitioners to repl* to the Co%%ent.
Petitioners, )ith the exception of Nepo%uceno, filed their respective replies to the Co%%ent0 7a< on !epte%ber =>,
:>8=, Dille-as filed a separate Repl* dated !epte%ber :;, :>8= 7Dille-as Repl*<F 7b< on "ctober 8, :>8=, Bel-ica, et
al. filed a Repl* dated !epte%ber =>, :>8= 7Bel-ica Repl*<F and 7c< on "ctober :, :>8=, Alcantara filed a Repl* dated
"ctober 8, :>8=.
"n "ctober 8, :>8=, the Court issued an Advisor* providin- for the -uidelines to be observed b* the parties for the
"ral Ar-u%ents scheduled on "ctober A, :>8=. n vie) of the technicalit* of the issues %aterial to the present cases,
incu%bent !olicitor 1eneral /rancis 2. $ardele4a 7!olicitor 1eneral< )as directed to brin- )ith hi% durin- the "ral
Ar-u%ents representativeJs fro% the DBM and Con-ress )ho )ould be able to co%petentl* and co%pletel* ans)er
Cuestions related to, a%on- others, the bud-etin- process and its i%ple%entation. /urther, the CoA Chairperson )as
appointed as a%icus curiae and thereb* reCuested to appear before the Court durin- the "ral Ar-u%ents.
"n "ctober A and 8>, :>8=, the "ral Ar-u%ents )ere conducted. .hereafter, the Court directed the parties to sub%it
their respective %e%oranda )ithin a period of seven 7;< da*s, or until "ctober 8;, :>8=, )hich the parties
subseCuentl* did.
.he ssues Before the Court
Based on the pleadin-s, and as refined durin- the "ral Ar-u%ents, the follo)in- are the %ain issues for the Court,s
resolution0
. Procedural ssues.
3hether or not 7a< the issues raised in the consolidated petitions involve an actual and +usticiable controvers*F 7b< the
issues raised in the consolidated petitions are %atters of polic* not sub+ect to +udicial revie)F 7c< petitioners have le-al
standin- to sueF and 7d< the Court,s Decision dated Au-ust 89, 899? in 1.R. Nos. 88=8>(, 88=8;?, 88=;'', and
88=AAA, entitled #Philippine Constitution Association v. EnriCue4#114 7Philconsa< and Decision dated April :?, :>8: in
1.R. No. 8'?9A;, entitled #6a)*ers A-ainst Monopol* and Povert* v. !ecretar* of Bud-et and
Mana-e%ent#115 76AMP< bar the re-liti-atio n of the issue of constitutionalit* of the #Por& Barrel !*ste%# under the
principles of res +udicata and stare decisis.
. !ubstantive ssues on the #Con-ressional Por& Barrel.#
3hether or not the :>8= PDA/ Article and all other Con-ressional Por& Barrel 6a)s si%ilar thereto are
unconstitutional considerin- that the* violate the principles ofJconstitutional provisions on 7a< separation of po)ersF
7b< non-dele-abilit* of le-islative po)erF 7c< chec&s and balancesF 7d< accountabilit*F 7e< political d*nastiesF and 7f<
local autono%*.
. !ubstantive ssues on the #Presidential Por& Barrel.#
3hether or not the phrases 7a< #and for such other purposes as %a* be hereafter directed b* the President# under
!ection A of PD 98>,116 relatin- to the Mala%pa*a /unds, and 7b< #to finance the priorit* infrastructure develop%ent
pro+ects and to finance the restoration of da%a-ed or destro*ed facilities due to cala%ities, as %a* be directed and
authori4ed b* the "ffice of the President of the Philippines# under !ection 8: of PD 8A'9, as a%ended b* PD 899=,
relatin- to the Presidential !ocial /und, are unconstitutional insofar as the* constitute undue dele-ations of le-islative
po)er.
.hese %ain issues shall be resolved in the order that the* have been stated. n addition, the Court shall also tac&le
certain ancillar* issues as pro%pted b* the present cases.
.he CourtNs Rulin-
.he petitions are partl* -ranted.
. Procedural ssues.
.he prevailin- rule in constitutional liti-ation is that no Cuestion involvin- the constitutionalit* or validit* of a la) or
-overn%ental act %a* be heard and decided b* the Court unless there is co%pliance )ith the le-al reCuisites for
+udicial inCuir*,117 na%el*0 7a< there %ust be an actual case or controvers* callin- for the exercise of +udicial po)erF
7b< the person challen-in- the act %ust have the standin- to Cuestion the validit* of the sub+ect act or issuanceF 7c< the
Cuestion of constitutionalit* %ust be raised at the earliest opportunit* F and 7d< the issue of constitutionalit* %ust be
the ver* lis %ota of the case.118 "f these reCuisites, case la) states that the first t)o are the %ost i%portant119and,
therefore, shall be discussed forth)ith.
A. Existence of an Actual Case or Controvers*.
B* constitutional fiat, +udicial po)er operates onl* )hen there is an actual case or controvers*. 120 .his is e%bodied in
!ection 8, Article D of the 89A; Constitution )hich pertinentl* states that #+udicial po)er includes the dut* of the
courts of +ustice to settle actual controversies involvin- ri-hts )hich are le-all* de%andable and enforceable x x x.#
$urisprudence provides that an actual case or controvers* is one )hich #involves a conflict of le-al ri-hts, an assertion
of opposite le-al clai%s, susceptible of +udicial resolution as distin-uished fro% a h*pothetical or abstract difference
or dispute.121 n other )ords, #there %ust be a contrariet* of le-al ri-hts that can be interpreted and enforced on the
basis of existin- la) and +urisprudence.#122 Related to the reCuire%ent of an actual case or controvers* is the
reCuire%ent of #ripeness,# %eanin- that the Cuestions raised for constitutional scrutin* are alread* ripe for
ad+udication. #A Cuestion is ripe for ad+udication )hen the act bein- challen-ed has had a direct adverse effect on the
individual challen-in- it. t is a prereCuisite that so%ethin- had then been acco%plished or perfor%ed b* either branch
before a court %a* co%e into the picture, and the petitioner %ust alle-e the existence of an i%%ediate or threatened
in+ur* to itself as a result of the challen-ed action.#123 #3ithal, courts )ill decline to pass upon constitutional issues
throu-h advisor* opinions, bereft as the* are of authorit* to resolve h*pothetical or %oot Cuestions.#124
Based on these principles, the Court finds that there exists an actual and +usticiable controvers* in these cases.
.he reCuire%ent of contrariet* of le-al ri-hts is clearl* satisfied b* the anta-onistic positions of the parties on the
constitutionalit* of the #Por& Barrel !*ste%.# Also, the Cuestions in these consolidated cases are ripe for ad+udication
since the challen-ed funds and the provisions allo)in- for their utili4ation @ such as the :>8= 1AA for the PDA/, PD
98> for the Mala%pa*a /unds and PD 8A'9, as a%ended b* PD 899=, for the Presidential !ocial /und @ are currentl*
existin- and operationalF hence, there exists an i%%ediate or threatened in+ur* to petitioners as a result of the
unconstitutional use of these public funds.
As for the PDA/, the Court %ust dispel the notion that the issues related thereto had been rendered %oot and
acade%ic b* the refor%s underta&en b* respondents. A case beco%es %oot )hen there is no %ore actual controvers*
bet)een the parties or no useful purpose can be served in passin- upon the %erits.125 Differin- fro% this description,
the Court observes that respondents, proposed line-ite% bud-etin- sche%e )ould not ter%inate the controvers* nor
di%inish the useful purpose for its resolution since said refor% is -eared to)ards the :>8? bud-et, and not the :>8=
PDA/ Article )hich, bein- a distinct sub+ect %atter, re%ains le-all* effective and existin-. Neither )ill the
President,s declaration that he had alread* #abolished the PDA/# render the issues on PDA/ %oot precisel* because
the Executive branch of -overn%ent has no constitutional authorit* to nullif* or annul its le-al existence. B*
constitutional desi-n, the annul%ent or nullification of a la) %a* be done either b* Con-ress, throu-h the passa-e of
a repealin- la), or b* the Court, throu-h a declaration of unconstitutionalit*. nstructive on this point is the follo)in-
exchan-e bet)een Associate $ustice Antonio .. Carpio 7$ustice Carpio< and the !olicitor 1eneral durin- the "ral
Ar-u%ents0126
$ustice Carpio0 .he President has ta&en an oath to faithfull* execute the la),127 correctO !olicitor 1eneral $ardele4a0
Pes, Pour 2onor.
$ustice Carpio0 And so the President cannot refuse to i%ple%ent the 1eneral Appropriations Act, correctO
!olicitor 1eneral $ardele4a0 3ell, that is our ans)er, Pour 2onor. n the case, for exa%ple of the PDA/, the President
has a dut* to execute the la)s but in the face of the outra-e over PDA/, the President )as sa*in-, # a% not sure that
)ill continue the release of the soft pro+ects,# and that started, Pour 2onor. No), )hether or not that Q 7interrupted<
$ustice Carpio0 Peah. )ill -rant the President if there are ano%alies in the pro+ect, he has the po)er to stop the
releases in the %eanti%e, to investi-ate, and that is !ection =A of Chapter ( of Boo& ' of the Revised Ad%inistrative
Code128 x x x. !o at %ost the President can suspend, no) if the President believes that the PDA/ is unconstitutional,
can he +ust refuse to i%ple%ent itO
!olicitor 1eneral $ardele4a0 No, Pour 2onor, as )e )ere tr*in- to sa* in the specific case of the PDA/ because of the
CoA Report, because of the reported irre-ularities and this Court can ta&e +udicial notice, even outside, outside of the
C"A Report, *ou have the report of the )histle-blo)ers, the President )as +ust exercisin- precisel* the dut* Q.
x x x x
$ustice Carpio0 Pes, and that is correct. Pou,ve seen the CoA Report, there are ano%alies, *ou stop and investi-ate,
and prosecute, he has done that. But, does that %ean that PDA/ has been repealedO
!olicitor 1eneral $ardele4a0 No, Pour 2onor x x x.
x x x x
$ustice Carpio0 !o that PDA/ can be le-all* abolished onl* in t)o 7:< cases. Con-ress passes a la) to repeal it, or this
Court declares it unconstitutional, correctO
!olictor 1eneral $ardele4a0 Pes, Pour 2onor.
$ustice Carpio0 .he President has no po)er to le-all* abolish PDA/. 7E%phases supplied<
Even on the assu%ption of %ootness, +urisprudence, nevertheless, dictates that #the %oot and acade%ic, principle is
not a %a-ical for%ula that can auto%aticall* dissuade the Court in resolvin- a case.# .he Court )ill decide cases,
other)ise %oot, if0 first, there is a -rave violation of the ConstitutionF second, the exceptional character of the
situation and the para%ount public interest is involvedF third, )hen the constitutional issue raised reCuires for%ulation
of controllin- principles to -uide the bench, the bar, and the publicF and fourth, the case is capable of repetition *et
evadin- revie).129
.he applicabilit* of the first exception is clear fro% the funda%ental posture of petitioners @ the* essentiall* alle-e
-rave violations of the Constitution )ith respect to, inter alia, the principles of separation of po)ers, non-dele-abilit*
of le-islative po)er, chec&s and balances, accountabilit* and local autono%*.
.he applicabilit* of the second exception is also apparent fro% the nature of the interests involved
@ the constitutionalit* of the ver* s*ste% )ithin )hich si-nificant a%ounts of public funds have been and continue to
be utili4ed and expended undoubtedl* presents a situation of exceptional character as )ell as a %atter of para%ount
public interest. .he present petitions, in fact, have been lod-ed at a ti%e )hen the s*ste%,s fla)s have never before
been %a-nified. .o the Court,s %ind, the coalescence of the CoA Report, the accounts of nu%erous )histle-blo)ers,
and the -overn%ent,s o)n reco-nition that refor%s are needed #to address the reported abuses of the
PDA/#130 de%onstrates a pri%a facie pattern of abuse )hich onl* underscores the i%portance of the %atter. t is also
b* this findin- that the Court finds petitioners, clai%s as not %erel* theori4ed, speculative or h*pothetical. "f note is
the )ei-ht accorded b* the Court to the findin-s %ade b* the CoA )hich is the constitutionall*-%andated audit ar% of
the -overn%ent. n Delos !antos v. CoA,131 a recent case )herein the Court upheld the CoA,s disallo)ance of
irre-ularl* disbursed PDA/ funds, it )as e%phasi4ed that0
.he C"A is endo)ed )ith enou-h latitude to deter%ine, prevent, and disallo) irre-ular, unnecessar*, excessive,
extrava-ant or unconscionable expenditures of -overn%ent funds. t is tas&ed to be vi-ilant and conscientious in
safe-uardin- the proper use of the -overn%ent5s, and ulti%atel* the people5s, propert*. .he exercise of its -eneral
audit po)er is a%on- the constitutional %echanis%s that -ives life to the chec& and balance s*ste% inherent in our
for% of -overn%ent.
t is the -eneral polic* of the Court to sustain the decisions of ad%inistrative authorities, especiall* one )hich is
constitutionall*-created, such as the CoA, not onl* on the basis of the doctrine of separation of po)ers but also for
their presu%ed expertise in the la)s the* are entrusted to enforce. /indin-s of ad%inistrative a-encies are accorded
not onl* respect but also finalit* )hen the decision and order are not tainted )ith unfairness or arbitrariness that
)ould a%ount to -rave abuse of discretion. t is onl* )hen the CoA has acted )ithout or in excess of +urisdiction, or
)ith -rave abuse of discretion a%ountin- to lac& or excess of +urisdiction, that this Court entertains a petition
Cuestionin- its rulin-s. x x x. 7E%phases supplied<
.hus, if onl* for the purpose of validatin- the existence of an actual and +usticiable controvers* in these cases, the
Court dee%s the findin-s under the CoA Report to be sufficient.
.he Court also finds the third exception to be applicable lar-el* due to the practical need for a definitive rulin- on the
s*ste%,s constitutionalit*. As disclosed durin- the "ral Ar-u%ents, the CoA Chairperson esti%ates that thousands of
notices of disallo)ances )ill be issued b* her office in connection )ith the findin-s %ade in the CoA Report. n this
relation, Associate $ustice Marvic Mario Dictor /. 6eonen 7$ustice 6eonen< pointed out that all of these )ould
eventuall* find their )a* to the courts.132 Accordin-l*, there is a co%pellin- need to for%ulate controllin- principles
relative to the issues raised herein in order to -uide the bench, the bar, and the public, not +ust for the expeditious
resolution of the anticipated disallo)ance cases, but %ore i%portantl*, so that the -overn%ent %a* be -uided on ho)
public funds should be utili4ed in accordance )ith constitutional principles.
/inall*, the application of the fourth exception is called for b* the reco-nition that the preparation and passa-e of the
national bud-et is, b* constitutional i%pri%atur, an affair of annual occurrence.133 .he relevance of the issues before
the Court does not cease )ith the passa-e of a #PDA/ -free bud-et for :>8?.#134 .he evolution of the #Por& Barrel
!*ste%,# b* its %ultifarious iterations throu-hout the course of histor*, lends a se%blance of truth to petitioners, clai%
that #the sa%e do- )ill +ust resurface )earin- a different collar.#135 n !anla&as v. Executive !ecretar*,136 the
-overn%ent had alread* bac&trac&ed on a previous course of action *et the Court used the #capable of repetition but
evadin- revie)# exception in order #to prevent si%ilar Cuestions fro% re- e%er-in-.#137 .he situation si%ilarl* holds
true to these cases. ndeed, the %*riad of issues underl*in- the %anner in )hich certain public funds are spent, if not
resolved at this %ost opportune ti%e, are capable of repetition and hence, %ust not evade +udicial revie).
B. Matters of Polic*0 the Political Luestion Doctrine.
.he #li%itation on the po)er of +udicial revie) to actual cases and controversies carries the assurance that #the
courts )ill not intrude into areas co%%itted to the other branches of -overn%ent.#138 Essentiall*, the fore-oin-
li%itation is a restate%ent of the political Cuestion doctrine )hich, under the classic for%ulation of Ba&er v.
Carr,139applies )hen there is found, a%on- others, #a textuall* de%onstrable constitutional co%%it%ent of the issue
to a coordinate political depart%ent,# #a lac& of +udiciall* discoverable and %ana-eable standards for resolvin- it# or
#the i%possibilit* of decidin- )ithout an initial polic* deter%ination of a &ind clearl* for non- +udicial discretion.#
Cast a-ainst this li-ht, respondents sub%it that the #the political branches are in the best position not onl* to perfor%
bud-et-related refor%s but also to do the% in response to the specific de%ands of their constituents# and, as such,
#ur-e the Court not to i%pose a solution at this sta-e.#140
.he Court %ust den* respondents, sub%ission.
!uffice it to state that the issues raised before the Court do not present political but le-al Cuestions )hich are )ithin its
province to resolve. A political Cuestion refers to #those Cuestions )hich, under the Constitution, are to be decided b*
the people in their soverei-n capacit*, or in re-ard to )hich full discretionar* authorit* has been dele-ated to the
6e-islature or executive branch of the 1overn%ent. t is concerned )ith issues dependent upon the )isdo%, not
le-alit*, of a particular %easure.#141 .he intrinsic constitutionalit* of the #Por& Barrel !*ste%# is not an issue
dependent upon the )isdo% of the political branches of -overn%ent but rather a le-al one )hich the Constitution
itself has co%%anded the Court to act upon. !crutini4in- the contours of the s*ste% alon- constitutional lines is a tas&
that the political branches of -overn%ent are incapable of renderin- precisel* because it is an exercise of +udicial
po)er. More i%portantl*, the present Constitution has not onl* vested the $udiciar* the ri-ht to exercise +udicial
po)er but essentiall* %a&es it a dut* to proceed there)ith. !ection 8, Article D of the 89A; Constitution cannot be
an* clearer0 #.he +udicial po)er shall be vested in one !upre%e Court and in such lo)er courts as %a* be established
b* la). t includes the dut* of the courts of +ustice to settle actual controversies involvin- ri-hts )hich are le-all*
de%andable and enforceable, and to deter%ine )hether or not there has been a -rave abuse of discretion a%ountin- to
lac& or excess of +urisdiction on the part of an* branch or instru%entalit* of the 1overn%ent.# n Estrada v.
Desierto,142 the expanded concept of +udicial po)er under the 89A; Constitution and its effect on the political Cuestion
doctrine )as explained as follo)s0143
.o a -reat de-ree, the 89A; Constitution has narro)ed the reach of the political Cuestion doctrine )hen it expanded
the po)er of +udicial revie) of this court not onl* to settle actual controversies involvin- ri-hts )hich are le-all*
de%andable and enforceable but also to deter%ine )hether or not there has been a -rave abuse of discretion
a%ountin- to lac& or excess of +urisdiction on the part of an* branch or instru%entalit* of -overn%ent. 2eretofore, the
+udiciar* has focused on the #thou shalt not5s# of the Constitution directed a-ainst the exercise of its +urisdiction. 3ith
the ne) provision, ho)ever, courts are -iven a -reater prero-ative to deter%ine )hat it can do to prevent -rave abuse
of discretion a%ountin- to lac& or excess of +urisdiction on the part of an* branch or instru%entalit* of -overn%ent.
Clearl*, the ne) provision did not +ust -rant the Court po)er of doin- nothin-. x x x 7E%phases supplied<
t %ust also be borne in %ind that H )hen the +udiciar* %ediates to allocate constitutional boundaries, it does not
assert an* superiorit* over the other depart%entsF does not in realit* nullif* or invalidate an act of the le-islature or
the executive, but onl* asserts the sole%n and sacred obli-ation assi-ned to it b* the Constitution.#144 .o a -reat
extent, the Court is laudabl* co-ni4ant of the refor%s underta&en b* its co-eCual branches of -overn%ent. But it is b*
constitutional force that the Court %ust faithfull* perfor% its dut*. Blti%atel*, it is the Court,s avo)ed intention that a
resolution of these cases )ould not arrest or in an* %anner i%pede the endeavors of the t)o other branches but, in
fact, help ensure that the pillars of chan-e are erected on fir% constitutional -rounds. After all, it is in the best interest
of the people that each -reat branch of -overn%ent, )ithin its o)n sphere, contributes its share to)ards achievin- a
holistic and -enuine solution to the proble%s of societ*. /or all these reasons, the Court cannot heed respondents, plea
for +udicial restraint.
C. 6ocus !tandi.
#.he -ist of the Cuestion of standin- is )hether a part* alle-es such personal sta&e in the outco%e of the controvers*
as to assure that concrete adverseness )hich sharpens the presentation of issues upon )hich the court depends for
illu%ination of difficult constitutional Cuestions. Bnless a person is in+uriousl* affected in an* of his constitutional
ri-hts b* the operation of statute or ordinance, he has no standin-.#145
Petitioners have co%e before the Court in their respective capacities as citi4en-taxpa*ers and accordin-l*, assert that
the* #dutifull* contribute to the coffers of the National .reasur*.#146 Clearl*, as taxpa*ers, the* possess the reCuisite
standin- to Cuestion the validit* of the existin- #Por& Barrel !*ste%# under )hich the taxes the* pa* have been and
continue to be utili4ed. t is undeniable that petitioners, as taxpa*ers, are bound to suffer fro% the unconstitutional
usa-e of public funds, if the Court so rules. nvariabl*, taxpa*ers have been allo)ed to sue )here there is a clai% that
public funds are ille-all* disbursed or that public %one* is bein- deflected to an* i%proper purpose, or that public
funds are )asted throu-h the enforce%ent of an invalid or unconstitutional la),147 as in these cases.
Moreover, as citi4ens, petitioners have eCuall* fulfilled the standin- reCuire%ent -iven that the issues the* have raised
%a* be classified as %atters #of transcendental i%portance, of overreachin- si-nificance to societ*, or of para%ount
public interest.#148 .he CoA Chairperson,s state%ent durin- the "ral Ar-u%ents that the present controvers* involves
#not %erel* a s*ste%s failure# but a #co%plete brea&do)n of controls#149 a%plifies, in addition to the %atters above-
discussed, the seriousness of the issues involved herein. ndeed, of -reater i%port than the da%a-e caused b* the
ille-al expenditure of public funds is the %ortal )ound inflicted upon the funda%ental la) b* the enforce%ent of an
invalid statute.150 All told, petitioners have sufficient locus standi to file the instant cases.
D. Res $udicata and !tare Decisis.
Res +udicata 7)hich %eans a #%atter ad+ud-ed#< and stare decisis non Cuieta et %overe 7or si%pl*, stare decisis )hich
%eans #follo) past precedents and do not disturb )hat has been settled#< are -eneral procedural la) principles )hich
both deal )ith the effects of previous but factuall* si%ilar dispositions to subseCuent cases. /or the cases at bar, the
Court exa%ines the applicabilit* of these principles in relation to its prior rulin-s in Philconsa and 6AMP.
.he focal point of res +udicata is the +ud-%ent. .he principle states that a +ud-%ent on the %erits in a previous case
rendered b* a court of co%petent +urisdiction )ould bind a subseCuent case if, bet)een the first and second actions,
there exists an identit* of parties, of sub+ect %atter, and of causes of action. 151 .his reCuired identit* is not, ho)ever,
attendant hereto since Philconsa and 6AMP, respectivel* involved constitutional challen-es a-ainst the 899? CD/
Article and :>>? PDA/ Article, )hereas the cases at bar call for a broader constitutional scrutin* of the entire #Por&
Barrel !*ste%.# Also, the rulin- in 6AMP is essentiall* a dis%issal based on a procedural technicalit* @ and, thus,
hardl* a +ud-%ent on the %erits @ in that petitioners therein failed to present an* #convincin- proof x x x sho)in-
that, indeed, there )ere direct releases of funds to the Me%bers of Con-ress, )ho actuall* spend the% accordin- to
their sole discretion# or #pertinent evidentiar* support to de%onstrate the ille-al %isuse of PDA/ in the for% of
&ic&bac&s and has beco%e a co%%on exercise of unscrupulous Me%bers of Con-ress.# As such, the Court up held, in
vie) of the presu%ption of constitutionalit* accorded to ever* la), the :>>? PDA/ Article, and sa) #no need to
revie) or reverse the standin- pronounce%ents in the said case.# 2ence, for the fore-oin- reasons, the res +udicata
principle, insofar as the Philconsa and 6AMP cases are concerned, cannot appl*.
"n the other hand, the focal point of stare decisis is the doctrine created. .he principle, entrenched under Article
A152 of the Civil Code, evo&es the -eneral rule that, for the sa&e of certaint*, a conclusion reached in one case should
be doctrinall* applied to those that follo) if the facts are substantiall* the sa%e, even thou-h the parties %a* be
different. t proceeds fro% the first principle of +ustice that, absent an* po)erful countervailin- considerations, li&e
cases ou-ht to be decided ali&e. .hus, )here the sa%e Cuestions relatin- to the sa%e event have been put for)ard b*
the parties si%ilarl* situated as in a previous case liti-ated and decided b* a co%petent court, the rule of stare decisis
is a bar to an* atte%pt to re-liti-ate the sa%e issue.153
Philconsa )as the first case )here a constitutional challen-e a-ainst a Por& Barrel provision, i.e., the 899? CD/
Article, )as resolved b* the Court. .o properl* understand its context, petitioners, posturin- )as that #the po)er
-iven to the Me%bers of Con-ress to propose and identif* pro+ects and activities to be funded b* the CD/ is an
encroach%ent b* the le-islature on executive po)er, since said po)er in an appropriation act is in i%ple%entation of
the la)# and that #the proposal and identification of the pro+ects do not involve the %a&in- of la)s or the repeal and
a%end%ent thereof, the onl* function -iven to the Con-ress b* the Constitution.#154 n deference to the fore-oin-
sub%issions, the Court reached the follo)in- %ain conclusions0 one, under the Constitution, the po)er of
appropriation, or the #po)er of the purse,# belon-s to Con-ressF t)o, the po)er of appropriation carries )ith it the
po)er to specif* the pro+ect or activit* to be funded under the appropriation la) and it can be detailed and as broad as
Con-ress )ants it to beF and, three, the proposals and identifications %ade b* Me%bers of Con-ress are %erel*
reco%%endator*. At once, it is apparent that the Philconsa resolution )as a li%ited response to a separation of po)ers
proble%, specificall* on the propriet* of conferrin- post-enact%ent identification authorit* to Me%bers of Con-ress.
"n the contrar*, the present cases call for a %ore holistic exa%ination of 7a< the inter-relation bet)een the CD/ and
PDA/ Articles )ith each other, for%ative as the* are of the entire #Por& Barrel !*ste%# as )ell as 7b< the intra-
relation of post-enact%ent %easures contained )ithin a particular CD/ or PDA/ Article, includin- not onl* those
related to the area of pro+ect identification but also to the areas of fund release and reali-n%ent. .he co%plexit* of the
issues and the broader le-al anal*ses herein )arranted %a* be, therefore, considered as a po)erful countervailin-
reason a-ainst a )holesale application of the stare decisis principle.
n addition, the Court observes that the Philconsa rulin- )as actuall* riddled )ith inherent constitutional
inconsistencies )hich si%ilarl* countervail a-ainst a full resort to stare decisis. As %a* be deduced fro% the %ain
conclusions of the case, Philconsa,s funda%ental pre%ise in allo)in- Me%bers of Con-ress to propose and identif* of
pro+ects )ould be that the said identification authorit* is but an aspect of the po)er of appropriation )hich has been
constitutionall* lod-ed in Con-ress. /ro% this pre%ise, the contradictions %a* be easil* seen. f the authorit* to
identif* pro+ects is an aspect of appropriation and the po)er of appropriation is a for% of le-islative po)er thereb*
lod-ed in Con-ress, then it follo)s that0 7a< it is Con-ress )hich should exercise such authorit*, and not its individual
Me%bersF 7b< such authorit* %ust be exercised )ithin the prescribed procedure of la) passa-e and, hence, should not
be exercised after the 1AA has alread* been passedF and 7c< such authorit*, as e%bodied in the 1AA, has the force of
la) and, hence, cannot be %erel* reco%%endator*. $ustice Ditu-,s Concurrin- "pinion in the sa%e case su%s up the
Philconsa Cuandar* in this )ise0 #Neither )ould it be ob+ectionable for Con-ress, b* la), to appropriate funds for
such specific pro+ects as it %a* be %indedF to -ive that authorit*, ho)ever, to the individual %e%bers of Con-ress in
)hatever -uise, a% afraid, )ould be constitutionall* i%per%issible.# As the Court no) lar-el* benefits fro%
hindsi-ht and current findin-s on the %atter, a%on- others, the CoA Report, the Court %ust partiall* abandon its
previous rulin- in Philconsa insofar as it validated the post-enact%ent identification authorit* of Me%bers of
Con-ress on the -uise that the sa%e )as %erel* reco%%endator*. .his postulate raises serious constitutional
inconsistencies )hich cannot be si%pl* excused on the -round that such %echanis% is #i%a-inative as it is
innovative.# Moreover, it %ust be pointed out that the recent case of Aba&ada 1uro Part* 6ist v.
Purisi%a1557Aba&ada< has effectivel* overturned Philconsa,s allo)ance of post-enact%ent le-islator participation in
vie) of the separation of po)ers principle. .hese constitutional inconsistencies and the Aba&ada rule )ill be
discussed in -reater detail in the ensuin- section of this Decision.
As for 6AMP, suffice it to restate that the said case )as dis%issed on a procedural technicalit* and, hence, has not set
an* controllin- doctrine susceptible of current application to the substantive issues in these cases. n fine, stare decisis
)ould not appl*.
. !ubstantive ssues.
A. Definition of .er%s.
Before the Court proceeds to resolve the substantive issues of these cases, it %ust first define the ter%s #Por& Barrel
!*ste%,# #Con-ressional Por& Barrel,# and #Presidential Por& Barrel# as the* are essential to the ensuin- discourse.
Petitioners define the ter% #Por& Barrel !*ste%# as the #collusion bet)een the 6e-islative and Executive branches of
-overn%ent to accu%ulate lu%p-su% public funds in their offices )ith unchec&ed discretionar* po)ers to deter%ine
its distribution as political lar-esse.#156 .he* assert that the follo)in- ele%ents %a&e up the Por& Barrel !*ste%0 7a<
lu%p-su% funds are allocated throu-h the appropriations process to an individual officerF 7b< the officer is -iven sole
and broad discretion in deter%inin- ho) the funds )ill be used or expendedF 7c< the -uidelines on ho) to spend or use
the funds in the appropriation are either va-ue, overbroad or inexistentF and 7d< pro+ects funded are intended to benefit
a definite constituenc* in a particular part of the countr* and to help the political careers of the disbursin- official b*
*ieldin- rich patrona-e benefits.157 .he* further state that the Por& Barrel !*ste% is co%prised of t)o 7:< &inds of
discretionar* public funds0 first, the Con-ressional 7or 6e-islative< Por& Barrel, currentl* &no)n as the PDA/F 158 and,
second, the Presidential 7or Executive< Por& Barrel, specificall*, the Mala%pa*a /unds under PD 98> and the
Presidential !ocial /und under PD 8A'9, as a%ended b* PD 899=.159
Considerin- petitioners, sub%ission and in reference to its local concept and le-al histor*, the Court defines the Por&
Barrel !*ste% as the collective bod* of rules and practices that -overn the %anner b* )hich lu%p-su%, discretionar*
funds, pri%aril* intended for local pro+ects, are utili4ed throu-h the respective participations of the 6e-islative and
Executive branches of -overn%ent, includin- its %e%bers. .he Por& Barrel !*ste% involves t)o 7:< &inds of lu%p-
su% discretionar* funds0
/irst, there is the Con-ressional Por& Barrel )hich is herein defined as a &ind of lu%p-su%, discretionar* fund
)herein le-islators, either individuall* or collectivel* or-ani4ed into co%%ittees, are able to effectivel* control
certain aspects of the fundNs utili4ation throu-h various post-enact%ent %easures andJor practices. n particular,
petitioners consider the PDA/, as it appears under the :>8= 1AA, as Con-ressional Por& Barrel since it is, inter alia, a
post-enact%ent %easure that allo)s individual le-islators to )ield a collective po)erF160 and
!econd, there is the Presidential Por& Barrel )hich is herein defined as a &ind of lu%p-su%, discretionar* fund )hich
allo)s the President to deter%ine the %anner of its utili4ation. /or reasons earlier stated, 161 the Court shall deli%it the
use of such ter% to refer onl* to the Mala%pa*a /unds and the Presidential !ocial /und.
3ith these definitions in %ind, the Court shall no) proceed to discuss the substantive issues of these cases.
B. !ubstantive ssues on the Con-ressional Por& Barrel.
8. !eparation of Po)ers.
a. !tate%ent of Principle.
.he principle of separation of po)ers refers to the constitutional de%arcation of the three funda%ental po)ers of
-overn%ent. n the celebrated )ords of $ustice 6aurel in An-ara v. Electoral Co%%ission, 162 it %eans that the
#Constitution has bloc&ed out )ith deft stro&es and in bold lines, allot%ent of po)er to the executive, the le-islative
and the +udicial depart%ents of the -overn%ent.#163 .o the le-islative branch of -overn%ent, throu-h
Con-ress,164belon-s the po)er to %a&e la)sF to the executive branch of -overn%ent, throu-h the
President,165 belon-s the po)er to enforce la)sF and to the +udicial branch of -overn%ent, throu-h the
Court,166 belon-s the po)er to interpret la)s. Because the three -reat po)ers have been, b* constitutional desi-n,
ordained in this respect, #each depart%ent of the -overn%ent has exclusive co-ni4ance of %atters )ithin its
+urisdiction, and is supre%e )ithin its o)n sphere.#167 .hus, #the le-islature has no authorit* to execute or construe
the la), the executive has no authorit* to %a&e or construe the la), and the +udiciar* has no po)er to %a&e or execute
the la).#168 .he principle of separation of po)ers and its concepts of autono%* and independence ste% fro% the
notion that the po)ers of -overn%ent %ust be divided to avoid concentration of these po)ers in an* one branchF the
division, it is hoped, )ould avoid an* sin-le branch fro% lordin- its po)er over the other branches or the
citi4enr*.169 .o achieve this purpose, the divided po)er %ust be )ielded b* co-eCual branches of -overn%ent that are
eCuall* capable of independent action in exercisin- their respective %andates. 6ac& of independence )ould result in
the inabilit* of one branch of -overn%ent to chec& the arbitrar* or self-interest assertions of another or others.170
Broadl* spea&in-, there is a violation of the separation of po)ers principle )hen one branch of -overn%ent undul*
encroaches on the do%ain of another. B! !upre%e Court decisions instruct that the principle of separation of po)ers
%a* be violated in t)o 7:< )a*s0 firstl*, #one branch %a* interfere i%per%issibl* )ith the otherNs perfor%ance of its
constitutionall* assi-ned function#F171 and #alternativel*, the doctrine %a* be violated )hen one branch assu%es a
function that %ore properl* is entrusted to another.#172 n other )ords, there is a violation of the principle )hen there
is i%per%issible 7a< interference )ith andJor 7b< assu%ption of another depart%ent,s functions.
.he enforce%ent of the national bud-et, as pri%aril* contained in the 1AA, is indisputabl* a function both
constitutionall* assi-ned and properl* entrusted to the Executive branch of -overn%ent. n 1uin-ona, $r. v. 2on.
Cara-ue173 71uin-ona, $r.<, the Court explained that the phase of bud-et execution #covers the various operational
aspects of bud-etin-# and accordin-l* includes #the evaluation of )or& and financial plans for individual activities,#
the #re-ulation and release of funds# as )ell as all #other related activities# that co%prise the bud-et execution
c*cle.174 .his is rooted in the principle that the allocation of po)er in the three principal branches of -overn%ent is a
-rant of all po)ers inherent in the%.175 .hus, unless the Constitution provides other)ise, the Executive depart%ent
should exclusivel* exercise all roles and prero-atives )hich -o into the i%ple%entation of the national bud-et as
provided under the 1AA as )ell as an* other appropriation la).
n vie) of the fore-oin-, the 6e-islative branch of -overn%ent, %uch %ore an* of its %e%bers, should not cross over
the field of i%ple%entin- the national bud-et since, as earlier stated, the sa%e is properl* the do%ain of the Executive.
A-ain, in 1uin-ona, $r., the Court stated that #Con-ress enters the picture )hen it deliberates or acts on the bud-et
proposals of the President. .hereafter, Con-ress, #in the exercise of its o)n +ud-%ent and )isdo%, for%ulates an
appropriation act precisel* follo)in- the process established b* the Constitution, )hich specifies that no %one* %a*
be paid fro% the .reasur* except in accordance )ith an appropriation %ade b* la).# Bpon approval and passa-e of
the 1AA, Con-ress, la) -%a&in- role necessaril* co%es to an end and fro% there the Executive,s role of
i%ple%entin- the national bud-et be-ins. !o as not to blur the constitutional boundaries bet)een the%, Con-ress %ust
#not concern it self )ith details for i%ple%entation b* the Executive.#176
.he fore-oin- cardinal postulates )ere definitivel* enunciated in Aba&ada )here the Court held that #fro% the
%o%ent the la) beco%es effective, an* provision of la) that e%po)ers Con-ress or an* of its %e%bers to pla* an*
role in the i%ple%entation or enforce%ent of the la) violates the principle of separation of po)ers and is thus
unconstitutional.#177 t %ust be clarified, ho)ever, that since the restriction onl* pertains to #an* role in the
i%ple%entation or enforce%ent of the la),# Con-ress %a* still exercise its oversi-ht function )hich is a %echanis%
of chec&s and balances that the Constitution itself allo)s. But it %ust be %ade clear that Con-ress, role %ust be
confined to %ere oversi-ht. An* post-enact%ent-%easure allo)in- le-islator participation be*ond oversi-ht is bereft
of an* constitutional basis and hence, tanta%ount to i%per%issible interference andJor assu%ption of executive
functions. As the Court ruled in Aba&ada0178
An* post-enact%ent con-ressional %easure x x x should be li%ited to scrutin* and investi-ation.8R)phi8 n particular,
con-ressional oversi-ht %ust be confined to the follo)in-0
78< scrutin* based pri%aril* on Con-ress, po)er of appropriation and the bud-et hearin-s conducted in
connection )ith it, its po)er to as& heads of depart%ents to appear before and be heard b* either of its
2ouses on an* %atter pertainin- to their depart%ents and its po)er of confir%ationF and
7:< investi-ation and %onitorin- of the i%ple%entation of la)s pursuant to the po)er of Con-ress to conduct
inCuiries in aid of le-islation.
An* action or step be*ond that )ill under%ine the separation of po)ers -uaranteed b* the Constitution. 7E%phases
supplied<
b. Application.
n these cases, petitioners sub%it that the Con-ressional Por& Barrel @ a%on- others, the :>8= PDA/ Article @
#)rec&s the assi-n%ent of responsibilities bet)een the political branches# as it is desi-ned to allo) individual
le-islators to interfere #)a* past the ti%e it should have ceased# or, particularl*, #after the 1AA is passed.# 179 .he*
state that the findin-s and reco%%endations in the CoA Report provide #an illustration of ho) absolute and definitive
the po)er of le-islators )ield over pro+ect i%ple%entation in co%plete violation of the constitutional principle of
separation of po)ers.#180 /urther, the* point out that the Court in the Philconsa case onl* allo)ed the CD/ to exist on
the condition that individual le-islators li%ited their role to reco%%endin- pro+ects and not if the* actuall* dictate
their i%ple%entation.181
/or their part, respondents counter that the separations of po)ers principle has not been violated since the President
%aintains #ulti%ate authorit* to control the execution of the 1AA and that he #retains the final discretion to re+ect#
the le-islators, proposals.182 .he* %aintain that the Court, in Philconsa, #upheld the constitutionalit* of the po)er of
%e%bers of Con-ress to propose and identif* pro+ects so lon- as such proposal and identification are
reco%%endator*.#183 As such, the* clai% that #ever*thin- in the !pecial Provisions Sof the :>8= PDA/ Article
follo)s the Philconsa fra%e)or&, and hence, re%ains constitutional.#184
.he Court rules in favor of petitioners.
As %a* be observed fro% its le-al histor*, the definin- feature of all for%s of Con-ressional Por& Barrel )ould be the
authorit* of le-islators to participate in the post-enact%ent phases of pro+ect i%ple%entation.
At its core, le-islators @ %a* it be throu-h pro+ect lists,185 prior consultations186 or pro-ra% %enus187 @ have been
consistentl* accorded post-enact%ent authorit* to identif* the pro+ects the* desire to be funded throu-h various
Con-ressional Por& Barrel allocations. Bnder the :>8= PDA/ Article, the statutor* authorit* of le-islators to identif*
pro+ects post-1AA %a* be construed fro% the i%port of !pecial Provisions 8 to = as )ell as the second para-raph of
!pecial Provision ?. .o elucidate, !pecial Provision 8 e%bodies the pro-ra% %enu feature )hich, as evinced fro%
past PDA/ Articles, allo)s individual le-islators to identif* PDA/ pro+ects for as lon- as the identified pro+ect falls
under a -eneral pro-ra% listed in the said %enu. Relatedl*, !pecial Provision : provides that the i%ple%entin-
a-encies shall, )ithin 9> da*s fro% the 1AA is passed, sub%it to Con-ress a %ore detailed priorit* list, standard or
desi-n prepared and sub%itted b* i%ple%entin- a-encies fro% )hich the le-islator %a* %a&e his choice. .he sa%e
provision further authori4es le-islators to identif* PDA/ pro+ects outside his district for as lon- as the representative
of the district concerned concurs in )ritin-. Mean)hile, !pecial Provision = clarifies that PDA/ pro+ects refer to
#pro+ects to be identified b* le-islators#188 and thereunder provides the allocation li%it for the total a%ount of pro+ects
identified b* each le-islator. /inall*, para-raph : of !pecial Provision ? reCuires that an* %odification and revision of
the pro+ect identification #shall be sub%itted to the 2ouse Co%%ittee on Appropriations and the !enate Co%%ittee on
/inance for favorable endorse%ent to the DBM or the i%ple%entin- a-enc*, as the case %a* be.# /ro% the fore-oin-
special provisions, it cannot be seriousl* doubted that le-islators have been accorded post-enact%ent authorit* to
identif* PDA/ pro+ects.
Aside fro% the area of pro+ect identification, le-islators have also been accorded post-enact%ent authorit* in the areas
of fund release and reali-n%ent. Bnder the :>8= PDA/ Article, the statutor* authorit* of le-islators to participate in
the area of fund release throu-h con-ressional co%%ittees is contained in !pecial Provision ( )hich explicitl* states
that #all reCuest for release of funds shall be supported b* the docu%ents prescribed under !pecial Provision No. 8
and favorabl* endorsed b* 2ouse Co%%ittee on Appropriations and the !enate Co%%ittee on /inance, as the case
%a* be#F )hile their statutor* authorit* to participate in the area of fund reali-n%ent is contained in0 first , para-raph
:, !pecial Provision ?189 )hich explicitl* state s, a%on- others, that #an* reali-n%ent of funds shall be sub%itted to
the 2ouse Co%%ittee on Appropriations and the !enate Co%%ittee on /inance for favorable endorse%ent to the DBM
or the i%ple%entin- a-enc*, as the case %a* be F and, second , para-raph 8, also of !pecial Provision ? )hich
authori4es the #!ecretaries of A-riculture, Education, Ener-*, nterior and 6ocal 1overn%ent, 6abor and
E%plo*%ent, Public 3or&s and 2i-h)a*s, !ocial 3elfare and Develop%ent and .rade and ndustr*190 x x x to
approve reali-n%ent fro% one pro+ectJscope to another )ithin the allot%ent received fro% this /und, sub+ect to a%on-
others 7iii< the reCuest is )ith the concurrence of the le-islator concerned.#
Clearl*, these post-enact%ent %easures )hich -overn the areas of pro+ect identification, fund release and fund
reali-n%ent are not related to functions of con-ressional oversi-ht and, hence, allo) le-islators to intervene andJor
assu%e duties that properl* belon- to the sphere of bud-et execution. ndeed, b* virtue of the fore-oin-, le-islators
have been, in one for% or another, authori4ed to participate in @ as 1uin-ona, $r. puts it @ #the various operational
aspects of bud-etin-,# includin- #the evaluation of )or& and financial plans for individual activities# and the
#re-ulation and release of funds# in violation of the separation of po)ers principle. .he funda%ental rule, as
cate-oricall* articulated in Aba&ada, cannot be overstated @ fro% the %o%ent the la) beco%es effective, an*
provision of la) that e%po)ers Con-ress or an* of its %e%bers to pla* an* role in the i%ple%entation or enforce%ent
of the la) violates the principle of separation of po)ers and is thus unconstitutional. 191 .hat the said authorit* is
treated as %erel* reco%%endator* in nature does not alter its unconstitutional tenor since the prohibition, to repeat,
covers an* role in the i%ple%entation or enforce%ent of the la). .o)ards this end, the Court %ust therefore abandon
its rulin- in Philconsa )hich sanctioned the conduct of le-islator identification on the -uise that the sa%e is %erel*
reco%%endator* and, as such, respondents, reliance on the sa%e falters alto-ether.
Besides, it %ust be pointed out that respondents have nonetheless failed to substantiate their position that the
identification authorit* of le-islators is onl* of reco%%endator* i%port. Luite the contrar*, respondents @ throu-h the
state%ents of the !olicitor 1eneral durin- the "ral Ar-u%ents @ have ad%itted that the identification of the le-islator
constitutes a %andator* reCuire%ent before his PDA/ can be tapped as a fundin- source, thereb* hi-hli-htin- the
indispensabilit* of the said act to the entire bud-et execution process0192
$ustice Bernabe0 No), )ithout the individual le-islatorNs identification of the pro+ect, can the PDA/ of the le-islator
be utili4edO
!olicitor 1eneral $ardele4a0 No, Pour 2onor.
$ustice Bernabe0 t cannotO
!olicitor 1eneral $ardele4a0 t cannotQ 7interrupted<
$ustice Bernabe0 !o %eanin- *ou should have the identification of the pro+ect b* the individual le-islatorO
!olicitor 1eneral $ardele4a0 Pes, Pour 2onor.
x x x x
$ustice Bernabe0 n short, the act of identification is %andator*O
!olictor 1eneral $ardele4a0 Pes, Pour 2onor. n the sense that if it is not done and then there is no identification.
x x x x
$ustice Bernabe0 No), )ould *ou &no) of specific instances )hen a pro+ect )as i%ple%ented )ithout the
identification b* the individual le-islatorO
!olicitor 1eneral $ardele4a0 do not &no), Pour 2onorF do not thin& so but have no specific exa%ples. )ould
doubt ver* %uch, Pour 2onor, because to i%ple%ent, there is a need for a !AR" and the NCA. And the !AR" and
the NCA are tri--ered b* an identification fro% the le-islator.
x x x x
!olictor 1eneral $ardele4a0 3hat )e %ean b* %andator*, Pour 2onor, is )e )ere repl*in- to a Cuestion, #2o) can a
le-islator %a&e sure that he is able to -et PDA/ /undsO# t is %andator* in the sense that he %ust identif*, in that
sense, Pour 2onor. "ther)ise, if he does not identif*, he cannot avail of the PDA/ /unds and his district )ould not be
able to have PDA/ /unds, onl* in that sense, Pour 2onor. 7E%phases supplied<
.hus, for all the fore-oin- reasons, the Court hereb* declares the :>8= PDA/ Article as )ell as all other provisions of
la) )hich si%ilarl* allo) le-islators to )ield an* for% of post-enact%ent authorit* in the i%ple%entation or
enforce%ent of the bud-et, unrelated to con-ressional oversi-ht, as violative of the separation of po)ers principle and
thus unconstitutional. Corollar* thereto, infor%al practices, throu-h )hich le-islators have effectivel* intruded into
the proper phases of bud-et execution, %ust be dee%ed as acts of -rave abuse of discretion a%ountin- to lac& or
excess of +urisdiction and, hence, accorded the sa%e unconstitutional treat%ent. .hat such infor%al practices do exist
and have, in fact, been constantl* observed throu-hout the *ears has not been substantiall* disputed here. As pointed
out b* Chief $ustice Maria 6ourdes P.A. !ereno 7Chief $ustice !ereno< durin- the "ral Ar-u%ents of these cases0 193
Chief $ustice !ereno0
No), fro% the responses of the representative of both, the DBM and t)o 7:< 2ouses of Con-ress, if )e enforces the
initial thou-ht that have, after had seen the extent of this research %ade b* %* staff, that neither the Executive nor
Con-ress frontall* faced the Cuestion of constitutional co%patibilit* of ho) the* )ere en-ineerin- the bud-et process.
n fact, the )ords *ou have been usin-, as the three la)*ers of the DBM, and both 2ouses of Con-ress has also been
usin- is surpriseF surprised that all of these thin-s are no) surfacin-. n fact, thou-ht that )hat the :>8= PDA/
provisions did )as to codif* in one section all the past practice that had been done since 8998. n a certain sense, )e
should be than&ful that the* are all no) in the PDA/ !pecial Provisions. x x x 7E%phasis and underscorin- supplied<
Blti%atel*, le-islators cannot exercise po)ers )hich the* do not have, )hether throu-h for%al %easures )ritten into
the la) or infor%al practices institutionali4ed in -overn%ent a-encies, else the Executive depart%ent be deprived of
)hat the Constitution has vested as its o)n.
:. Non-dele-abilit* of 6e-islative Po)er.
a. !tate%ent of Principle.
As an ad+unct to the separation of po)ers principle,194 le-islative po)er shall be exclusivel* exercised b* the bod* to
)hich the Constitution has conferred the sa%e. n particular, !ection 8, Article D of the 89A; Constitution states that
such po)er shall be vested in the Con-ress of the Philippines )hich shall consist of a !enate and a 2ouse of
Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people b* the provision on initiative and referendu%. 195 Based on
this provision, it is clear that onl* Con-ress, actin- as a bica%eral bod*, and the people, throu-h the process of
initiative and referendu%, %a* constitutionall* )ield le-islative po)er and no other. .his pre%ise e%bodies the
principle of non-dele-abilit* of le-islative po)er, and the onl* reco-ni4ed exceptions thereto )ould be0 7a< dele-ated
le-islative po)er to local -overn%ents )hich, b* i%%e%orial practice, are allo)ed to le-islate on purel* local
%attersF196 and 7b< constitutionall*--rafted exceptions such as the authorit* of the President to, b* la), exercise
po)ers necessar* and proper to carr* out a declared national polic* in ti%es of )ar or other national e%er-enc*, 197or
fix )ithin specified li%its, and sub+ect to such li%itations and restrictions as Con-ress %a* i%pose, tariff rates, i%port
and export Cuotas, tonna-e and )harfa-e dues, and other duties or i%posts )ithin the fra%e)or& of the national
develop%ent pro-ra% of the 1overn%ent.198
Notabl*, the principle of non-dele-abilit* should not be confused as a restriction to dele-ate rule-%a&in- authorit* to
i%ple%entin- a-encies for the li%ited purpose of either fillin- up the details of the la) for its enforce%ent
7supple%entar* rule-%a&in-< or ascertainin- facts to brin- the la) into actual operation 7contin-ent rule-
%a&in-<.199.he conceptual treat%ent and li%itations of dele-ated rule-%a&in- )ere explained in the case of People v.
Maceren200 as follo)s0
.he -rant of the rule-%a&in- po)er to ad%inistrative a-encies is a relaxation of the principle of separation of po)ers
and is an exception to the nondele-ation of le-islative po)ers. Ad%inistrative re-ulations or #subordinate le-islation#
calculated to pro%ote the public interest are necessar* because of #the -ro)in- co%plexit* of %odern life, the
%ultiplication of the sub+ects of -overn%ental re-ulations, and the increased difficult* of ad%inisterin- the la).#
x x x x
Nevertheless, it %ust be e%phasi4ed that the rule-%a&in- po)er %ust be confined to details for re-ulatin- the %ode or
proceedin- to carr* into effect the la) as it has been enacted. .he po)er cannot be extended to a%endin- or
expandin- the statutor* reCuire%ents or to e%brace %atters not covered b* the statute. Rules that subvert the statute
cannot be sanctioned. 7E%phases supplied<
b. Application.
n the cases at bar, the Court observes that the :>8= PDA/ Article, insofar as it confers post-enact%ent identification
authorit* to individual le-islators, violates the principle of non-dele-abilit* since said le-islators are effectivel*
allo)ed to individuall* exercise the po)er of appropriation, )hich @ as settled in Philconsa @ is lod-ed in
Con-ress.201 .hat the po)er to appropriate %ust be exercised onl* throu-h le-islation is clear fro% !ection :978<,
Article D of the 89A; Constitution )hich states that0 #No %one* shall be paid out of the .reasur* except in pursuance
of an appropriation %ade b* la).# .o understand )hat constitutes an act of appropriation, the Court, in Ben-4on v.
!ecretar* of $ustice and nsular Auditor202 7Ben-4on<, held that the po)er of appropriation involves 7a< the settin-
apart b* la) of a certain su% fro% the public revenue for 7b< a specified purpose. Essentiall*, under the :>8= PDA/
Article, individual le-islators are -iven a personal lu%p-su% fund fro% )hich the* are able to dictate 7a< ho) %uch
fro% such fund )ould -o to 7b< a specific pro+ect or beneficiar* that the* the%selves also deter%ine. As these t)o 7:<
acts co%prise the exercise of the po)er of appropriation as described in Ben-4on, and -iven that the :>8= PDA/
Article authori4es individual le-islators to perfor% the sa%e, undoubtedl*, said le-islators have been conferred the
po)er to le-islate )hich the Constitution does not, ho)ever, allo). .hus, &eepin- )ith the principle of non-
dele-abilit* of le-islative po)er, the Court hereb* declares the :>8= PDA/ Article, as )ell as all other for%s of
Con-ressional Por& Barrel )hich contain the si%ilar le-islative identification feature as herein discussed, as
unconstitutional.
=. Chec&s and Balances.
a. !tate%ent of PrincipleF te%-Deto Po)er.
.he fact that the three -reat po)ers of -overn%ent are intended to be &ept separate and distinct does not %ean that
the* are absolutel* unrestrained and independent of each other. .he Constitution has also provided for an elaborate
s*ste% of chec&s and balances to secure coordination in the )or&in-s of the various depart%ents of the
-overn%ent.203
A pri%e exa%ple of a constitutional chec& and balance )ould be the PresidentNs po)er to veto an ite% )ritten into an
appropriation, revenue or tariff bill sub%itted to hi% b* Con-ress for approval throu-h a process &no)n as #bill
present%ent.# .he President,s ite%-veto po)er is found in !ection :;7:<, Article D of the 89A; Constitution )hich
reads as follo)s0
!ec. :;. x x x.
x x x x
7:< .he President shall have the po)er to veto an* particular ite% or ite%s in an appropriation, revenue, or tariff bill,
but the veto shall not affect the ite% or ite%s to )hich he does not ob+ect.
.he present%ent of appropriation, revenue or tariff bills to the President, )herein he %a* exercise his po)er of ite%-
veto, for%s part of the #sin-le, finel* )rou-ht and exhaustivel* considered, procedures# for la)-passa-e as specified
under the Constitution.204 As stated in Aba&ada, the final step in the la)-%a&in- process is the #sub%ission of the bill
to the President for approval. "nce approved, it ta&es effect as la) after the reCuired publication.#205
Elaboratin- on the President,s ite%-veto po)er and its relevance as a chec& on the le-islature, the Court, in Ben-4on,
explained that0206
.he for%er "r-anic Act and the present Constitution of the Philippines %a&e the Chief Executive an inte-ral part of
the la)-%a&in- po)er. 2is disapproval of a bill, co%%onl* &no)n as a veto, is essentiall* a le-islative act. .he
Cuestions presented to the %ind of the Chief Executive are precisel* the sa%e as those the le-islature %ust deter%ine
in passin- a bill, except that his )ill be a broader point of vie).
.he Constitution is a li%itation upon the po)er of the le-islative depart%ent of the -overn%ent, but in this respect it
is a -rant of po)er to the executive depart%ent. .he 6e-islature has the affir%ative po)er to enact la)sF the Chief
Executive has the ne-ative po)er b* the constitutional exercise of )hich he %a* defeat the )ill of the 6e-islature. t
follo)s that the Chief Executive %ust find his authorit* in the Constitution. But in exercisin- that authorit* he %a*
not be confined to rules of strict construction or ha%pered b* the un)ise interference of the +udiciar*. .he courts )ill
indul-e ever* intend%ent in favor of the constitutionalit* of a veto in the sa%e %anner as the* )ill presu%e the
constitutionalit* of an act as ori-inall* passed b* the 6e-islature. 7E%phases supplied<
.he +ustification for the President,s ite%-veto po)er rests on a variet* of polic* -oals such as to prevent lo--rollin-
le-islation,207 i%pose fiscal restrictions on the le-islature, as )ell as to fortif* the executive branch,s role in the
bud-etar* process.208 n %%i-ration and Naturali4ation !ervice v. Chadha, the B! !upre%e Court characteri4ed the
President,s ite%-po)er as #a salutar* chec& upon the le-islative bod*, calculated to -uard the co%%unit* a-ainst the
effects of factions, precipitanc*, or of an* i%pulse unfriendl* to the public -ood, )hich %a* happen to influence a
%a+orit* of that bod*#F phrased differentl*, it is %eant to #increase the chances in favor of the co%%unit* a-ainst the
passin- of bad la)s, throu-h haste, inadvertence, or desi-n.#209
/or the President to exercise his ite%-veto po)er, it necessaril* follo)s that there exists a proper #ite%# )hich %a* be
the ob+ect of the veto. An ite%, as defined in the field of appropriations, pertains to #the particulars, the details, the
distinct and severable parts of the appropriation or of the bill.# n the case of Ben-4on v. !ecretar* of $ustice of the
Philippine slands,210 the B! !upre%e Court characteri4ed an ite% of appropriation as follo)s0
An ite% of an appropriation bill obviousl* %eans an ite% )hich, in itself, is a specific appropriation of %one*, not
so%e -eneral provision of la) )hich happens to be put into an appropriation bill. 7E%phases supplied<
"n this pre%ise, it %a* be concluded that an appropriation bill, to ensure that the President %a* be able to exercise his
po)er of ite% veto, %ust contain #specific appropriations of %one*# and not onl* #-eneral provisions# )hich provide
for para%eters of appropriation.
/urther, it is si-nificant to point out that an ite% of appropriation %ust be an ite% characteri4ed b* sin-ular
correspondence @ %eanin- an allocation of a specified sin-ular a%ount for a specified sin-ular purpose, other)ise
&no)n as a #line-ite%.#211 .his treat%ent not onl* allo)s the ite% to be consistent )ith its definition as a #specific
appropriation of %one*# but also ensures that the President %a* discernibl* veto the sa%e. Based on the fore-oin-
for%ulation, the existin- Cala%it* /und, Contin-ent /und and the ntelli-ence /und, bein- appropriations )hich state
a specified a%ount for a specific purpose, )ould then be considered as #line- ite%# appropriations )hich are ri-htfull*
sub+ect to ite% veto. 6i&e)ise, it %ust be observed that an appropriation %a* be validl* apportioned into co%ponent
percenta-es or valuesF ho)ever, it is crucial that each percenta-e or value %ust be allocated for its o)n correspondin-
purpose for such co%ponent to be considered as a proper line-ite%. Moreover, as $ustice Carpio correctl* pointed out,
a valid appropriation %a* even have several related purposes that are b* accountin- and bud-etin- practice considered
as one purpose, e.-., M""E 7%aintenance and other operatin- expenses<, in )hich case the related purposes shall be
dee%ed sufficientl* specific for the exercise of the President,s ite% veto po)er. /inall*, special purpose funds and
discretionar* funds )ould eCuall* sCuare )ith the constitutional %echanis% of ite%-veto for as lon- as the* follo)
the rule on sin-ular correspondence as herein discussed. Anent special purpose funds, it %ust be added that !ection
:(7?<, Article D of the 89A; Constitution reCuires that the #special appropriations bill shall specif* the purpose for
)hich it is intended, and shall be supported b* funds actuall* available as certified b* the National .reasurer, or t o be
raised b* a correspondin- revenue proposal therein.# Mean)hile, )ith respect to discretionar* funds, !ection : (7'<,
Article D of the 89A; Constitution reCuires that said funds #shall be disbursed onl* for public purposes to be
supported b* appropriate vouchers and sub+ect to such -uidelines as %a* be prescribed b* la).#
n contrast, )hat bec&ons constitutional infir%it* are appropriations )hich %erel* provide for a sin-ular lu%p-su%
a%ount to be tapped as a source of fundin- for %ultiple purposes. !ince such appropriation t*pe necessitates the
further deter%ination of both the actual a%ount to be expended and the actual purpose of the appropriation )hich
%ust still be chosen fro% the %ultiple purposes stated in the la), it cannot be said that the appropriation la) alread*
indicates a #specific appropriation of %one* and hence, )ithout a proper line-ite% )hich the President %a* veto.
As a practical result, the President )ould then be faced )ith the predica%ent of either vetoin- the entire appropriation
if he finds so%e of its purposes )asteful or undesirable, or approvin- the entire appropriation so as not to hinder so%e
of its le-iti%ate purposes. /inall*, it %a* not be a%iss to state that such arran-e%ent also raises non-dele-abilit*
issues considerin- that the i%ple%entin- authorit* )ould still have to deter%ine, a-ain, both the actual a%ount to be
expended and the actual purpose of the appropriation. !ince the fore-oin- deter%inations constitute the inte-ral
aspects of the po)er to appropriate, the i%ple%entin- authorit* )ould, in effect, be exercisin- le-islative prero-atives
in violation of the principle of non-dele-abilit*.
b. Application.
n these cases, petitioners clai% that #in the current x x x s*ste% )here the PDA/ is a lu%p-su% appropriation, the
le-islator,s identification of the pro+ects after the passa-e of the 1AA denies the President the chance to veto that ite%
later on.#212 Accordin-l*, the* sub%it that the #ite% veto po)er of the President %andates that appropriations bills
adopt line-ite% bud-etin-# and that #Con-ress cannot choose a %ode of bud-etin- )hich effectivel* renders the
constitutionall*--iven po)er of the President useless.#213
"n the other hand, respondents %aintain that the text of the Constitution envisions a process )hich is intended to %eet
the de%ands of a %oderni4in- econo%* and, as such, lu%p-su% appropriations are essential to financiall* address
situations )hich are barel* foreseen )hen a 1AA is enacted. .he* ar-ue that the decision of the Con-ress to create
so%e lu%p-su% appropriations is constitutionall* allo)ed and textuall*--rounded.214
.he Court a-rees )ith petitioners.
Bnder the :>8= PDA/ Article, the a%ount of P:?.;9 Billion onl* appears as a collective allocation li%it since the said
a%ount )ould be further divided a%on- individual le-islators )ho )ould then receive personal lu%p-su% allocations
and could, after the 1AA is passed, effectivel* appropriate PDA/ funds based on their o)n discretion. As these
inter%ediate appropriations are %ade b* le-islators onl* after the 1AA is passed and hence, outside of the la), it
necessaril* %eans that the actual ite%s of PDA/ appropriation )ould not have been )ritten into the 1eneral
Appropriations Bill and thus effectuated )ithout veto consideration. .his &ind of lu%p-su%Jpost-enact%ent le-islative
identification bud-etin- s*ste% fosters the creation of a bud-et )ithin a bud-et# )hich subverts the prescribed
procedure of present%ent and conseCuentl* i%pairs the President,s po)er of ite% veto. As petitioners aptl* point out,
the above-described s*ste% forces the President to decide bet)een 7a< acceptin- the entire P:?.;9 Billion PDA/
allocation )ithout &no)in- the specific pro+ects of the le-islators, )hich %a* or %a* not be consistent )ith his
national a-enda and 7b< re+ectin- the )hole PDA/ to the detri%ent of all other le-islators )ith le-iti%ate pro+ects.215
Moreover, even )ithout its post-enact%ent le-islative identification feature, the :>8= PDA/ Article )ould re%ain
constitutionall* fla)ed since it )ould then operate as a prohibited for% of lu%p-su% appropriation above-
characteri4ed. n particular, the lu%p-su% a%ount of P:?.;9 Billion )ould be treated as a %ere fundin- source
allotted for %ultiple purposes of spendin-, i.e., scholarships, %edical %issions, assistance to indi-ents, preservation of
historical %aterials, construction of roads, flood control, etc. .his setup connotes that the appropriation la) leaves the
actual a%ounts and purposes of the appropriation for further deter%ination and, therefore, does not readil* indicate a
discernible ite% )hich %a* be sub+ect to the President,s po)er of ite% veto.
n fact, on the accountabilit* side, the sa%e lu%p-su% bud-etin- sche%e has, as the CoA Chairperson rela*s, #li%ited
state auditors fro% obtainin- relevant data and infor%ation that )ould aid in %ore strin-entl* auditin- the utili4ation
of said /unds.#216 Accordin-l*, she reco%%ends the adoption of a #line b* line bud-et or a%ount per proposed
pro-ra%, activit* or pro+ect, and per i%ple%entin- a-enc*.#217
2ence, in vie) of the reasons above-stated, the Court finds the :>8= PDA/ Article, as )ell as all Con-ressional Por&
Barrel 6a)s of si%ilar operation, to be unconstitutional. .hat such bud-etin- s*ste% provides for a -reater de-ree of
flexibilit* to account for future contin-encies cannot be an excuse to defeat )hat the Constitution reCuires. Clearl*,
the first and essential truth of the %atter is that unconstitutional %eans do not +ustif* even co%%endable ends.218
c. Accountabilit*.
Petitioners further relate that the s*ste% under )hich various for%s of Con-ressional Por& Barrel operate defies public
accountabilit* as it renders Con-ress incapable of chec&in- itself or its Me%bers. n particular, the* point out that the
Con-ressional Por& Barrel #-ives each le-islator a direct, financial interest in the s%ooth, speed* passin- of the *earl*
bud-et# )hich turns the% #fro% fiscali4ers# into #financiall*-interested partners.#219 .he* also clai% that the s*ste%
has an effect on re- election as #the PDA/ excels in self-perpetuation of elective officials.# /inall*, the* add that the
#PDA/ i%pairs the po)er of i%peach%ent# as such #funds are indeed Cuite useful, ,to )ell, accelerate the decisions
of senators.,#220
.he Court a-rees in part.
.he aphoris% for-ed under !ection 8, Article T of the 89A; Constitution, )hich states that #public office is a public
trust,# is an overarchin- re%inder that ever* instru%entalit* of -overn%ent should exercise their official functions
onl* in accordance )ith the principles of the Constitution )hich e%bodies the para%eters of the people,s trust. .he
notion of a public trust connotes accountabilit*,221 hence, the various %echanis%s in the Constitution )hich are
desi-ned to exact accountabilit* fro% public officers.
A%on- others, an accountabilit* %echanis% )ith )hich the proper expenditure of public funds %a* be chec&ed is the
po)er of con-ressional oversi-ht. As %entioned in Aba&ada,222 con-ressional oversi-ht %a* be perfor%ed either
throu-h0 7a< scrutin* based pri%aril* on Con-ress, po)er of appropriation and the bud-et hearin-s conducted in
connection )ith it, its po)er to as& heads of depart%ents to appear before and be heard b* either of its 2ouses on an*
%atter pertainin- to their depart%ents and its po)er of confir%ationF223 or 7b< investi-ation and %onitorin- of the
i%ple%entation of la)s pursuant to the po)er of Con-ress to conduct inCuiries in aid of le-islation.224
.he Court a-rees )ith petitioners that certain features e%bedded in so%e for%s of Con-ressional Por& Barrel, a%on-
others the :>8= PDA/ Article, has an effect on con-ressional oversi-ht. .he fact that individual le-islators are -iven
post-enact%ent roles in the i%ple%entation of the bud-et %a&es it difficult for the% to beco%e disinterested
#observers# )hen scrutini4in-, investi-atin- or %onitorin- the i%ple%entation of the appropriation la). .o a certain
extent, the conduct of oversi-ht )ould be tainted as said le-islators, )ho are vested )ith post-enact%ent authorit*,
)ould, in effect, be chec&in- on activities in )hich the* the%selves participate. Also, it %ust be pointed out that this
ver* sa%e concept of post-enact%ent authori4ation runs afoul of !ection 8?, Article D of the 89A; Constitution )hich
provides that0
!ec. 8?. No !enator or Me%ber of the 2ouse of Representatives %a* personall* appear as counsel before an* court of
+ustice or before the Electoral .ribunals, or Cuasi-+udicial and other ad%inistrative bodies. Neither shall he, directl* or
indirectl*, be interested financiall* in an* contract )ith, or in an* franchise or special privile-e -ranted b* the
1overn%ent, or an* subdivision, a-enc*, or instru%entalit* thereof, includin- an* -overn%ent-o)ned or controlled
corporation, or its subsidiar*, durin- his ter% of office. 2e shall not intervene in an* %atter before an* office of the
1overn%ent for his pecuniar* benefit or )here he %a* be called upon to act on account of his office. 7E%phasis
supplied<
Clearl*, allo)in- le-islators to intervene in the various phases of pro+ect i%ple%entation @ a %atter before another
office of -overn%ent @ renders the% susceptible to ta&in- undue advanta-e of their o)n office.
.he Court, ho)ever, cannot co%pletel* a-ree that the sa%e post-enact%ent authorit* andJor the individual le-islator,s
control of his PDA/ per se )ould allo) hi% to perpetuate hi%self in office. ndeed, )hile the Con-ressional Por&
Barrel and a le-islator,s use thereof %a* be lin&ed to this area of interest, the use of his PDA/ for re-election purposes
is a %atter )hich %ust be anal*4ed based on particular facts and on a case-to-case basis.
/inall*, )hile the Court accounts for the possibilit* that the close operational proxi%it* bet)een le-islators and the
Executive depart%ent, throu-h the for%er,s post-enact%ent participation, %a* affect the process of i%peach%ent, this
%atter lar-el* borders on the do%ain of politics and does not strictl* concern the Por& Barrel !*ste%,s intrinsic
constitutionalit*. As such, it is an i%proper sub+ect of +udicial assess%ent.
n su%, insofar as its post-enact%ent features dilute con-ressional oversi-ht and violate !ection 8?, Article D of the
89A; Constitution, thus i%pairin- public accountabilit*, the :>8= PDA/ Article and other for%s of Con-ressional
Por& Barrel of si%ilar nature are dee%ed as unconstitutional.
?. Political D*nasties.
"ne of the petitioners sub%its that the Por& Barrel !*ste% enables politicians )ho are %e%bers of political d*nasties
to accu%ulate funds to perpetuate the%selves in po)er, in contravention of !ection :', Article of the 89A;
Constitution225 )hich states that0
!ec. :'. .he !tate shall -uarantee eCual access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political d*nasties as
%a* be defined b* la). 7E%phasis and underscorin- supplied<
At the outset, suffice it to state that the fore-oin- provision is considered as not self-executin- due to the Cualif*in-
phrase #as %a* be defined b* la).# n this respect, said provision does not, b* and of itself, provide a +udiciall*
enforceable constitutional ri-ht but %erel* specifies -uideline for le-islative or executive action.226 .herefore, since
there appears to be no standin- la) )hich cr*stalli4es the polic* on political d*nasties for enforce%ent, the Court
%ust defer fro% rulin- on this issue.
n an* event, the Court finds the above-stated ar-u%ent on this score to be lar-el* speculative since it has not been
properl* de%onstrated ho) the Por& Barrel !*ste% )ould be able to propa-ate political d*nasties.
(. 6ocal Autono%*.
.he !tate,s polic* on local autono%* is principall* stated in !ection :(, Article and !ections : and =, Article T of
the 89A; Constitution )hich read as follo)s0
AR.C6E
!ec. :(. .he !tate shall ensure the autono%* of local -overn%ents.
AR.C6E T
!ec. :. .he territorial and political subdivisions shall en+o* local autono%*.
!ec. =. .he Con-ress shall enact a local -overn%ent code )hich shall provide for a %ore responsive and accountable
local -overn%ent structure instituted throu-h a s*ste% of decentrali4ation )ith effective %echanis%s of recall,
initiative, and referendu%, allocate a%on- the different local -overn%ent units their po)ers, responsibilities, and
resources, and provide for the Cualifications, election, appoint%ent and re%oval, ter%, salaries, po)ers and functions
and duties of local officials, and all other %atters relatin- to the or-ani4ation and operation of the local units.
Pursuant thereto, Con-ress enacted RA ;8'>,227 other)ise &no)n as the #6ocal 1overn%ent Code of 8998# 761C<,
)herein the polic* on local autono%* had been %ore specificall* explicated as follo)s0
!ec. :. Declaration of Polic*. @ 7a< t is hereb* declared the polic* of the !tate that the territorial and political
subdivisions of the !tate shall en+o* -enuine and %eanin-ful local autono%* to enable the% to attain their fullest
develop%ent as self-reliant co%%unities and %a&e the% %ore effective partners in the attain%ent of national -oals.
.o)ard this end, the !tate shall provide for a %ore responsive and accountable local -overn%ent structure instituted
throu-h a s*ste% of decentrali4ation )hereb* local -overn%ent units shall be -iven %ore po)ers, authorit*,
responsibilities, and resources. .he process of decentrali4ation shall proceed fro% the National 1overn%ent to the
local -overn%ent units.
x x x x
7c< t is li&e)ise the polic* of the !tate to reCuire all national a-encies and offices to conduct periodic consultations
)ith appropriate local -overn%ent units, non-overn%ental and people,s or-ani4ations, and other concerned sectors of
the co%%unit* before an* pro+ect or pro-ra% is i%ple%ented in their respective +urisdictions. 7E%phases and
underscorin- supplied<
.he above-Cuoted provisions of the Constitution and the 61C reveal the polic* of the !tate to e%po)er local
-overn%ent units 761Bs< to develop and ulti%atel*, beco%e self-sustainin- and effective contributors to the national
econo%*. As explained b* the Court in Philippine 1a%efo)l Co%%ission v. nter%ediate Appellate Court0228
.his is as -ood an occasion as an* to stress the co%%it%ent of the Constitution to the polic* of local autono%* )hich
is intended to provide the needed i%petus and encoura-e%ent to the develop%ent of our local political subdivisions as
#self - reliant co%%unities.# n the )ords of $efferson, #Municipal corporations are the s%all republics fro% )hich the
-reat one derives its stren-th.# .he vitali4ation of local -overn%ents )ill enable their inhabitants to full* exploit their
resources and %ore i%portant, i%bue the% )ith a deepened sense of involve%ent in public affairs as %e%bers of the
bod* politic. .his ob+ective could be blunted b* undue interference b* the national -overn%ent in purel* local affairs
)hich are best resolved b* the officials and inhabitants of such political units. .he decision )e reach toda* confor%s
not onl* to the letter of the pertinent la)s but also to the spirit of the Constitution. 229 7E%phases and underscorin-
supplied<
n the cases at bar, petitioners contend that the Con-ressional Por& Barrel -oes a-ainst the constitutional principles on
local autono%* since it allo)s district representatives, )ho are national officers, to substitute their +ud-%ents in
utili4in- public funds for local develop%ent.230 .he Court a-rees )ith petitioners.
Philconsa described the 899? CD/ as an atte%pt #to %a&e eCual the uneCual# and that #it is also a reco-nition that
individual %e%bers of Con-ress, far %ore than the President and their con-ressional collea-ues, are li&el* to be
&no)led-eable about the needs of their respective constituents and the priorit* to be -iven each pro+ect.#231Dra)in-
stren-th fro% this pronounce%ent, previous le-islators +ustified its existence b* statin- that #the relativel* s%all
pro+ects i%ple%ented under the Con-ressional Por& Barrel co%ple%ent and lin& the national develop%ent -oals to the
countr*side and -rassroots as )ell as to depressed areas )hich are overloo&ed b* central a-encies )hich are
preoccupied )ith %e-a-pro+ects.232 !i%ilarl*, in his Au-ust :=, :>8= speech on the #abolition# of PDA/ and
bud-etar* refor%s, President ACuino %entioned that the Con-ressional Por& Barrel )as ori-inall* established for a
)orth* -oal, )hich is to enable the representatives to identif* pro+ects for co%%unities that the 61B concerned
cannot afford.233
Not)ithstandin- these declarations, the Court, ho)ever, finds an inherent defect in the s*ste% )hich actuall* belies
the avo)ed intention of #%a&in- eCual the uneCual.# n particular, the Court observes that the -au-e of PDA/ and
CD/ allocationJdivision is based solel* on the fact of office, )ithout ta&in- into account the specific interests and
peculiarities of the district the le-islator represents. n this re-ard, the allocationJdivision li%its are clearl* not based
on -enuine para%eters of eCualit*, )herein econo%ic or -eo-raphic indicators have been ta&en into consideration. As
a result, a district representative of a hi-hl*-urbani4ed %etropolis -ets the sa%e a%ount of fundin- as a district
representative of a far-flun- rural province )hich )ould be relativel* #underdeveloped# co%pared to the for%er. .o
add, )hat rouses -raver scrutin* is that even !enators and Part*-6ist Representatives @ and in so%e *ears, even the
Dice-President @ )ho do not represent an* localit*, receive fundin- fro% the Con-ressional Por& Barrel as )ell. .hese
certainl* are anathe%a to the Con-ressional Por& Barrel,s ori-inal intent )hich is #to %a&e eCual the uneCual.#
Blti%atel*, the PDA/ and CD/ had beco%e personal funds under the effective control of each le-islator and -iven
unto the% on the sole account of their office.
.he Court also observes that this concept of le-islator control underl*in- the CD/ and PDA/ conflicts )ith the
functions of the various 6ocal Develop%ent Councils 76DCs< )hich are alread* le-all* %andated to #assist the
correspondin- san--unian in settin- the direction of econo%ic and social develop%ent, and coordinatin- develop%ent
efforts )ithin its territorial +urisdiction.#234 Considerin- that 6DCs are instru%entalities )hose functions are
essentiall* -eared to)ards %ana-in- local affairs,235 their pro-ra%s, policies and resolutions should not be overridden
nor duplicated b* individual le-islators, )ho are national officers that have no la)-%a&in- authorit* except onl* )hen
actin- as a bod*. .he under%inin- effect on local autono%* caused b* the post-enact%ent authorit* conferred to the
latter )as succinctl* put b* petitioners in the follo)in- )ise0236
3ith PDA/, a Con-ress%an can si%pl* b*pass the local develop%ent council and initiate pro+ects on his o)n, and
even ta&e sole credit for its execution. ndeed, this t*pe of personalit*-driven pro+ect identification has not onl*
contributed little to the overall develop%ent of the district, but has even contributed to #further )ea&enin-
infrastructure plannin- and coordination efforts of the -overn%ent.#
.hus, insofar as individual le-islators are authori4ed to intervene in purel* local %atters and thereb* subvert -enuine
local autono%*, the :>8= PDA/ Article as )ell as all other si%ilar for%s of Con-ressional Por& Barrel is dee%ed
unconstitutional.
3ith this final issue on the Con-ressional Por& Barrel resolved, the Court no) turns to the substantive issues
involvin- the Presidential Por& Barrel.
C. !ubstantive ssues on the Presidential Por& Barrel.
8. Dalidit* of Appropriation.
Petitioners preli%inaril* assail !ection A of PD 98> and !ection 8: of PD8A'9 7no), a%ended b* PD 899=<, )hich
respectivel* provide for the Mala%pa*a /unds and the Presidential !ocial /und, as invalid appropriations la)s since
the* do not have the #pri%ar* and specific# purpose of authori4in- the release of public funds fro% the National
.reasur*. Petitioners sub%it that !ection A of PD 98> is not an appropriation la) since the #pri%ar* and specific
purpose of PD 98> is the creation of an Ener-* Develop%ent Board and !ection A thereof onl* created a !pecial /und
incidental thereto.237 n si%ilar re-ard, petitioners ar-ue that !ection 8: of PD 8A'9 is neither a valid appropriations
la) since the allocation of the Presidential !ocial /und is %erel* incidental to the #pri%ar* and specific# purpose of
PD 8A'9 )hich is the a%end%ent of the /ranchise and Po)ers of PA1C"R. 238 n vie) of the fore-oin-, petitioners
suppose that such funds are bein- used )ithout an* valid la) allo)in- for their proper appropriation in violation of
!ection :978<, Article D of the 89A; Constitution )hich states that0 #No %one* shall be paid out of the .reasur*
except in pursuance of an appropriation %ade b* la).#239
.he Court disa-rees.
#An appropriation %ade b* la) under the conte%plation of !ection :978<, Article D of the 89A; Constitution exists
)hen a provision of la) 7a< sets apart a deter%inate or deter%inable240 a%ount of %one* and 7b< allocates the sa%e
for a particular public purpose. .hese t)o %ini%u% desi-nations of a%ount and purpose ste% fro% the ver*
definition of the )ord #appropriation,# )hich %eans #to allot, assi-n, set apart or appl* to a particular use or purpose,#
and hence, if )ritten into the la), de%onstrate that the le-islative intent to appropriate exists. As the Constitution
#does not provide or prescribe an* particular for% of )ords or reli-ious recitals in )hich an authori4ation or
appropriation b* Con-ress shall be %ade, except that it be ,%ade b* la),,# an appropriation la) %a* @ accordin- to
Philconsa @ be #detailed and as broad as Con-ress )ants it to be# for as lon- as the intent to appropriate %a* be
-leaned fro% the sa%e. As held in the case of 1uin-ona, $r.0241
.here is no provision in our Constitution that provides or prescribes an* particular for% of )ords or reli-ious recitals
in )hich an authori4ation or appropriation b* Con-ress shall be %ade, except that it be #%ade b* la),# such as
precisel* the authori4ation or appropriation under the Cuestioned presidential decrees. n other )ords, in ter%s of ti%e
hori4ons, an appropriation %a* be %ade i%pliedl* 7as b* past but subsistin- le-islations< as )ell as expressl* for the
current fiscal *ear 7as b* enact%ent of la)s b* the present Con-ress<, +ust as said appropriation %a* be %ade in
-eneral as )ell as in specific ter%s. .he Con-ressional authori4ation %a* be e%bodied in annual la)s, such as a
-eneral appropriations act or in special provisions of la)s of -eneral or special application )hich appropriate public
funds for specific public purposes, such as the Cuestioned decrees. An appropriation %easure is sufficient if the
le-islative intention clearl* and certainl* appears fro% the lan-ua-e e%plo*ed 7n re Continuin- Appropriations, =: P.
:;:<, )hether in the past or in the present. 7E%phases and underscorin- supplied<
6i&e)ise, as ruled b* the B! !upre%e Court in !tate of Nevada v. 6a 1rave0242
.o constitute an appropriation there %ust be %one* placed in a fund applicable to the desi-nated purpose. .he )ord
appropriate %eans to allot, assi-n, set apart or appl* to a particular use or purpose. An appropriation in the sense of the
constitution %eans the settin- apart a portion of the public funds for a public purpose. No particular for% of )ords is
necessar* for the purpose, if the intention to appropriate is plainl* %anifested. 7E%phases supplied<
.hus, based on the fore-oin-, the Court cannot sustain the ar-u%ent that the appropriation %ust be the #pri%ar* and
specific# purpose of the la) in order for a valid appropriation la) to exist. .o reiterate, if a le-al provision desi-nates
a deter%inate or deter%inable a%ount of %one* and allocates the sa%e for a particular public purpose, then the
le-islative intent to appropriate beco%es apparent and, hence, alread* sufficient to satisf* the reCuire%ent of an
#appropriation %ade b* la)# under conte%plation of the Constitution.
!ection A of PD 98> pertinentl* provides0
!ection A. Appropriations. x x x
All fees, revenues and receipts of the Board fro% an* and all sources includin- receipts fro% service contracts and
a-ree%ents such as application and processin- fees, si-nature bonus, discover* bonus, production bonusF all %one*
collected fro% concessionaires, representin- unspent )or& obli-ations, fines and penalties under the Petroleu% Act of
89?9F as )ell as the -overn%ent share representin- ro*alties, rentals, production share on service contracts and si%ilar
pa*%ents on the exploration, develop%ent and exploitation of ener-* resources, shall for% part of a !pecial /und to
be used to finance ener-* resource develop%ent and exploitation pro-ra%s and pro+ects of the -overn%ent and for
such other purposes as %a* be hereafter directed b* the President. 7E%phases supplied<
3hereas !ection 8: of PD 8A'9, as a%ended b* PD 899=, reads0
!ec. 8:. !pecial Condition of /ranchise. U After deductin- five 7(E< percent as /ranchise .ax, the /ift* 7(>E<
percent share of the 1overn%ent in the a--re-ate -ross earnin-s of the Corporation fro% this /ranchise, or '>E if the
a--re-ate -ross earnin-s be less than P8(>,>>>,>>>.>> shall be set aside and shall accrue to the 1eneral /und to
finance the priorit* infrastructure develop%ent pro+ects and to finance the restoration of da%a-ed or destro*ed
facilities due to cala%ities, as %a* be directed and authori4ed b* the "ffice of the President of the Philippines.
7E%phases supplied<
Anal*4in- the le-al text vis-V-vis the above-%entioned principles, it %a* then be concluded that 7a< !ection A of PD
98>, )hich creates a !pecial /und co%prised of #all fees, revenues, and receipts of the Ener-* Develop%ent Board
fro% an* and all sources# 7a deter%inable a%ount< #to be used to finance ener-* resource develop%ent and
exploitation pro-ra%s and pro+ects of the -overn%ent and for such other purposes as %a* be hereafter directed b* the
President# 7a specified public purpose<, and 7b< !ection 8: of PD 8A'9, as a%ended b* PD 899=, )hich si%ilarl* sets
aside, #after deductin- five 7(E< percent as /ranchise .ax, the /ift* 7(>E< percent share of the 1overn%ent in the
a--re-ate -ross earnin-s of PA1C"R, or '>E, if the a--re-ate -ross earnin-s be less than P8(>,>>>,>>>.>># 7also a
deter%inable a%ount< #to finance the priorit* infrastructure develop%ent pro+ects and x x x the restoration of
da%a-ed or destro*ed facilities due to cala%ities, as %a* be directed and authori4ed b* the "ffice of the President of
the Philippines# 7also a specified public purpose<, are le-al appropriations under !ection :978<, Article D of the 89A;
Constitution.
n this relation, it is apropos to note that the :>8= PDA/ Article cannot be properl* dee%ed as a le-al appropriation
under the said constitutional provision precisel* because, as earlier stated, it contains post-enact%ent %easures )hich
effectivel* create a s*ste% of inter%ediate appropriations. .hese inter%ediate appropriations are the actual
appropriations %eant for enforce%ent and since the* are %ade b* individual le-islators after the 1AA is passed, the*
occur outside the la). As such, the Court observes that the real appropriation %ade under the :>8= PDA/ Article is
not the P:?.;9 Billion allocated for the entire PDA/, but rather the post-enact%ent deter%inations %ade b* the
individual le-islators )hich are, to repeat, occurrences outside of the la). rrefra-abl*, the :>8= PDA/ Article does
not constitute an #appropriation %ade b* la)# since it, in its truest sense, onl* authori4es individual le-islators to
appropriate in violation of the non-dele-abilit* principle as afore-discussed.
:. Bndue Dele-ation.
"n a related %atter, petitioners contend that !ection A of PD 98> constitutes an undue dele-ation of le-islative po)er
since the phrase #and for such other purposes as %a* be hereafter directed b* the President# -ives the President
#unbridled discretion to deter%ine for )hat purpose the funds )ill be used.#243 Respondents, on the other hand, ur-ed
the Court to appl* the principle of e+usde% -eneris to the sa%e section and thus, construe the phrase #and for such
other purposes as %a* be hereafter directed b* the President# to refer onl* to other purposes related #to ener-*
resource develop%ent and exploitation pro-ra%s and pro+ects of the -overn%ent.#244
.he Court a-rees )ith petitioners, sub%issions.
3hile the desi-nation of a deter%inate or deter%inable a%ount for a particular public purpose is sufficient for a le-al
appropriation to exist, the appropriation la) %ust contain adeCuate le-islative -uidelines if the sa%e la) dele-ates
rule-%a&in- authorit* to the Executive245 either for the purpose of 7a< fillin- up the details of the la) for its
enforce%ent, &no)n as supple%entar* rule-%a&in-, or 7b< ascertainin- facts to brin- the la) into actual operation,
referred to as contin-ent rule-%a&in-.246 .here are t)o 7:< funda%ental tests to ensure that the le-islative -uidelines
for dele-ated rule-%a&in- are indeed adeCuate. .he first test is called the #co%pleteness test.# Case la) states that a
la) is co%plete )hen it sets forth therein the polic* to be executed, carried out, or i%ple%ented b* the dele-ate. "n
the other hand, the second test is called the #sufficient standard test.# $urisprudence holds that a la) la*s do)n a
sufficient standard )hen it provides adeCuate -uidelines or li%itations in the la) to %ap out the boundaries of the
dele-ate,s authorit* and prevent the dele-ation fro% runnin- riot.247 .o be sufficient, the standard %ust specif* the
li%its of the dele-ate,s authorit*, announce the le-islative polic*, and identif* the conditions under )hich it is to be
i%ple%ented.248
n vie) of the fore-oin-, the Court a-rees )ith petitioners that the phrase #and for such other purposes as %a* be
hereafter directed b* the President# under !ection A of PD 98> constitutes an undue dele-ation of le-islative po)er
insofar as it does not la* do)n a sufficient standard to adeCuatel* deter%ine the li%its of the President,s authorit*
)ith respect to the purpose for )hich the Mala%pa*a /unds %a* be used. As it reads, the said phrase -ives the
President )ide latitude to use the Mala%pa*a /unds for an* other purpose he %a* direct and, in effect, allo)s hi% to
unilaterall* appropriate public funds be*ond the purvie) of the la). .hat the sub+ect phrase %a* be confined onl* to
#ener-* resource develop%ent and exploitation pro-ra%s and pro+ects of the -overn%ent# under the principle of
e+usde% -eneris, %eanin- that the -eneral )ord or phrase is to be construed to include @ or be restricted to @ thin-s
a&in to, rese%blin-, or of the sa%e &ind or class as those specificall* %entioned, 249 is belied b* three 7=< reasons0
first, the phrase #ener-* resource develop%ent and exploitation pro-ra%s and pro+ects of the -overn%ent# states a
sin-ular and -eneral class and hence, cannot be treated as a statutor* reference of specific thin-s fro% )hich the
-eneral phrase #for such other purposes# %a* be li%itedF second, the said phrase also exhausts the class it represents,
na%el* ener-* develop%ent pro-ra%s of the -overn%entF250 and, third, the Executive depart%ent has, in fact, used
the Mala%pa*a /unds for non-ener-* related purposes under the sub+ect phrase, thereb* contradictin- respondents,
o)n position that it is li%ited onl* to #ener-* resource develop%ent and exploitation pro-ra%s and pro+ects of the
-overn%ent.#251 .hus, )hile !ection A of PD 98> %a* have passed the co%pleteness test since the polic* of ener-*
develop%ent is clearl* deducible fro% its text, the phrase #and for such other purposes as %a* be hereafter directed b*
the President# under the sa%e provision of la) should nonetheless be stric&en do)n as unconstitutional as it lies
independentl* unfettered b* an* sufficient standard of the dele-atin- la). .his not)ithstandin-, it %ust be
underscored that the rest of !ection A, insofar as it allo)s for the use of the Mala%pa*a /unds #to finance ener-*
resource develop%ent and exploitation pro-ra%s and pro+ects of the -overn%ent,# re%ains le-all* effective and
subsistin-. .ruth be told, the declared unconstitutionalit* of the afore%entioned phrase is but an assurance that the
Mala%pa*a /unds )ould be used @ as it should be used @ onl* in accordance )ith the avo)ed purpose and intention
of PD 98>.
As for the Presidential !ocial /und, the Court ta&es +udicial notice of the fact that !ection 8: of PD 8A'9 has alread*
been a%ended b* PD 899= )hich thus %oots the parties, sub%issions on the sa%e.252 Nevertheless, since the
a%endator* provision %a* be readil* exa%ined under the current para%eters of discussion, the Court proceeds to
resolve its constitutionalit*.
Pri%aril*, !ection 8: of PD 8A'9, as a%ended b* PD 899=, indicates that the Presidential !ocial /und %a* be used
#to first, finance the priorit* infrastructure develop%ent pro+ects and second, to finance the restoration of da%a-ed or
destro*ed facilities due to cala%ities, as %a* be directed and authori4ed b* the "ffice of the President of the
Philippines.# .he Court finds that )hile the second indicated purpose adeCuatel* curtails the authorit* of the President
to spend the Presidential !ocial /und onl* for restoration purposes )hich arise fro% cala%ities, the first indicated
purpose, ho)ever, -ives hi% carte blanche authorit* to use the sa%e fund for an* infrastructure pro+ect he %a* so
deter%ine as a #priorit*#. Deril*, the la) does not suppl* a definition of #priorit* in frastructure develop%ent pro+ects#
and hence, leaves the President )ithout an* -uideline to construe the sa%e. .o note, the deli%itation of a pro+ect as
one of #infrastructure# is too broad of a classification since the said ter% could pertain to an* &ind of facilit*. .his
%a* be deduced fro% its lexico-raphic definition as follo)s0 #the underl*in- fra%e)or& of a s*ste%, especiall* public
services and facilities 7such as hi-h)a*s, schools, brid-es, se)ers, and )ater-s*ste%s< needed to support co%%erce as
)ell as econo%ic and residential develop%ent.#253 n fine, the phrase #to finance the priorit* infrastructure
develop%ent pro+ects# %ust be stric&en do)n as unconstitutional since @ si%ilar to the above-assailed provision under
!ection A of PD 98> @ it lies independentl* unfettered b* an* sufficient standard of the dele-atin- la). As the* are
severable, all other provisions of !ection 8: of PD 8A'9, as a%ended b* PD 899=, re%ains le-all* effective and
subsistin-.
D. Ancillar* Pra*ers. 8.
PetitionersN Pra*er to be /urnished 6ists and Detailed Reports.
Aside fro% see&in- the Court to declare the Por& Barrel !*ste% unconstitutional @ as the Court did so in the context
of its pronounce%ents %ade in this Decision @ petitioners eCuall* pra* that the Executive !ecretar* andJor the DBM
be ordered to release to the CoA and to the public0 7a< #the co%plete scheduleJlist of le-islators )ho have availed of
their PDA/ and D6P fro% the *ears :>>= to :>8=, specif*in- the use of the funds, the pro+ect or activit* and the
recipient entities or individuals, and all pertinent data thereto# 7PDA/ Bse !cheduleJ6ist<F254 and 7b< #the use of the
Executive,s lu%p-su%, discretionar* funds, includin- the proceeds fro% the x x x Mala%pa*a /unds and re%ittances
fro% the PA1C"R x x x fro% :>>= to :>8=, specif*in- the x x x pro+ect or activit* and the recipient entities or
individuals, and all pertinent data thereto#255 7Presidential Por& Bse Report<. Petitioners, pra*er is -rounded on
!ection :A, Article and !ection ;, Article of the 89A; Constitution )hich read as follo)s0
AR.C6E
!ec. :A. !ub+ect to reasonable conditions prescribed b* la), the !tate adopts and i%ple%ents a polic* of full public
disclosure of all its transactions involvin- public interest.
AR.C6E !ec. ;.
.he ri-ht of the people to infor%ation on %atters of public concern shall be reco-ni4ed. Access to official records, and
to docu%ents and papers pertainin- to official acts, transactions, or decisions, as )ell as to -overn%ent research data
used as basis for polic* develop%ent, shall be afforded the citi4en, sub+ect to such li%itations as %a* be provided b*
la).
.he Court denies petitioners, sub%ission.
Case la) instructs that the proper re%ed* to invo&e the ri-ht to infor%ation is to file a petition for %anda%us. As
explained in the case of 6e-aspi v. Civil !ervice Co%%ission0256
3hile the %anner of exa%inin- public records %a* be sub+ect to reasonable re-ulation b* the -overn%ent a-enc* in
custod* thereof, the dut* to disclose the infor%ation of public concern, and to afford access to public records cannot
be discretionar* on the part of said a-encies. Certainl*, its perfor%ance cannot be %ade contin-ent upon the discretion
of such a-encies. "ther)ise, the en+o*%ent of the constitutional ri-ht %a* be rendered nu-ator* b* an* )hi%sical
exercise of a-enc* discretion. .he constitutional dut*, not bein- discretionar*, its perfor%ance %a* be co%pelled b* a
)rit of %anda%us in a proper case.
But )hat is a proper case for Manda%us to issueO n the case before Bs, the public ri-ht to be enforced and the
conco%itant dut* of the !tate are uneCuivocabl* set forth in the Constitution.
.he decisive Cuestion on the propriet* of the issuance of the )rit of %anda%us in this case is, )hether the infor%ation
sou-ht b* the petitioner is )ithin the a%bit of the constitutional -uarantee. 7E%phases supplied<
Corollaril*, in the case of Dal%onte v. Bel%onte $r.257 7Dal%onte<, it has been clarified that the ri-ht to infor%ation
does not include the ri-ht to co%pel the preparation of #lists, abstracts, su%%aries and the li&e.# n the sa%e case, it
)as stressed that it is essential that the #applicant has a )ell -defined, clear and certain le-al ri-ht to the thin-
de%anded and that it is the i%perative dut* of defendant to perfor% the act reCuired.# 2ence, )ithout the fore-oin-
substantiations, the Court cannot -rant a particular reCuest for infor%ation. .he pertinent portions of Dal%onte are
hereunder Cuoted0258
Althou-h citi4ens are afforded the ri-ht to infor%ation and, pursuant thereto, are entitled to #access to official
records,# the Constitution does not accord the% a ri-ht to co%pel custodians of official records to prepare lists,
abstracts, su%%aries and the li&e in their desire to acCuire infor%ation on %atters of public concern.
t %ust be stressed that it is essential for a )rit of %anda%us to issue that the applicant has a )ell-defined, clear and
certain le-al ri-ht to the thin- de%anded and that it is the i%perative dut* of defendant to perfor% the act reCuired.
.he correspondin- dut* of the respondent to perfor% the reCuired act %ust be clear and specific 6e%i v. Dalencia,
1.R. No. 6-:>;'A, Nove%ber :9,89'A,8:' !CRA :>=F "ca%po v. !ubido, 1.R. No. 6-:A=??, Au-ust :;, 89;', ;:
!CRA ??=.
.he reCuest of the petitioners fails to %eet this standard, there bein- no dut* on the part of respondent to prepare the
list reCuested. 7E%phases supplied<
n these cases, aside fro% the fact that none of the petitions are in the nature of %anda%us actions, the Court finds that
petitioners have failed to establish a #a )ell-defined, clear and certain le-al ri-ht# to be furnished b* the Executive
!ecretar* andJor the DBM of their reCuested PDA/ Bse !cheduleJ6ist and Presidential Por& Bse Report. Neither did
petitioners assert an* la) or ad%inistrative issuance )hich )ould for% the bases of the latter,s dut* to furnish the%
)ith the docu%ents reCuested. 3hile petitioners pra* that said infor%ation be eCuall* released to the CoA, it %ust be
pointed out that the CoA has not been i%pleaded as a part* to these cases nor has it filed an* petition before the Court
to be allo)ed access to or to co%pel the release of an* official docu%ent relevant to the conduct of its audit
investi-ations. 3hile the Court reco-ni4es that the infor%ation reCuested is a %atter of si-nificant public concern,
ho)ever, if onl* to ensure that the para%eters of disclosure are properl* foisted and so as not to undul* ha%per the
eCuall* i%portant interests of the -overn%ent, it is constrained to den* petitioners, pra*er on this score, )ithout
pre+udice to a proper %anda%us case )hich the*, or even the CoA, %a* choose to pursue throu-h a separate petition.
t bears clarification that the Court,s denial herein should onl* cover petitioners, plea to be furnished )ith such
scheduleJlist and report and not in an* )a* den* the%, or the -eneral public, access to official docu%ents )hich are
alread* existin- and of public record. !ub+ect to reasonable re-ulation and absent an* valid statutor* prohibition,
access to these docu%ents should not be proscribed. .hus, in Dal%onte, )hile the Court denied the application for
%anda%us to)ards the preparation of the list reCuested b* petitioners therein, it nonetheless allo)ed access to the
docu%ents sou-ht for b* the latter, sub+ect, ho)ever, to the custodian,s reasonable re-ulations,vi4.0259
n fine, petitioners are entitled to access to the docu%ents evidencin- loans -ranted b* the 1!!, sub+ect to reasonable
re-ulations that the latter %a* pro%ul-ate relatin- to the %anner and hours of exa%ination, to the end that da%a-e to
or loss of the records %a* be avoided, that undue interference )ith the duties of the custodian of the records %a* be
prevented and that the ri-ht of other persons entitled to inspect the records %a* be insured 6e-aspi v. Civil !ervice
Co%%ission, supra at p. (=A, Cuotin- !ubido v. "4aeta, A> Phil. =A=, =A;. .he petition, as to the second and third
alternative acts sou-ht to be done b* petitioners, is %eritorious.
2o)ever, the sa%e cannot be said )ith re-ard to the first act sou-ht b* petitioners, i.e.,
#to furnish petitioners the list of the na%es of the Batasan- Pa%bansa %e%bers belon-in- to the BND" and PDP-
6aban )ho )ere able to secure clean loans i%%ediatel* before the /ebruar* ; election thru the intercessionJ%ar-inal
note of the then /irst 6ad* %elda Marcos.#
.he Court, therefore, applies the sa%e treat%ent here.
:. PetitionersN Pra*er to nclude Matters in Con-ressional Deliberations.
Petitioners further see& that the Court #order the inclusion in bud-etar* deliberations )ith the Con-ress of all
presentl*, off-bud-et, lu%p su%, discretionar* funds includin- but not li%ited to, proceeds fro% the x x x Mala%pa*a
/und, re%ittances fro% the PA1C"R and the PC!" or the Executive,s !ocial /unds.#260
!uffice it to state that the above-stated relief sou-ht b* petitioners covers a %atter )hich is -enerall* left to the
prero-ative of the political branches of -overn%ent. 2ence, lest the Court itself overreach, it %ust eCuall* den* their
pra*er on this score.
=. RespondentsN Pra*er to 6ift .R"F ConseCuential Effects of Decision.
.he final issue to be resolved ste%s fro% the interpretation accorded b* the DBM to the concept of released funds. n
response to the Court,s !epte%ber 8>, :>8= .R" that en+oined the release of the re%ainin- PDA/ allocated for the
*ear :>8=, the DBM issued Circular 6etter No. :>8=-A dated !epte%ber :;, :>8= 7DBM Circular :>8=-A< )hich
pertinentl* reads as follo)s0
=.> Nonetheless, PDA/ pro+ects funded under the /P :>8= 1AA, )here a !pecial Allot%ent Release "rder 7!AR"<
has been issued b* the DBM and such !AR" has been obli-ated b* the i%ple%entin- a-encies prior to the issuance of
the .R", %a* continuall* be i%ple%ented and disburse%ents thereto effected b* the a-encies concerned.
Based on the text of the fore-oin-, the DBM authori4ed the continued i%ple%entation and disburse%ent of PDA/
funds as lon- as the* are0 first, covered b* a !AR"F and, second, that said !AR" had been obli-ated b* the
i%ple%entin- a-enc* concerned prior to the issuance of the Court,s !epte%ber 8>, :>8= .R".
Petitioners ta&e issue )ith the fore-oin- circular, ar-uin- that #the issuance of the !AR" does not *et involve the
release of funds under the PDA/, as release is onl* tri--ered b* the issuance of a Notice of Cash Allocation
S7NCA<W.#261 As such, PDA/ disburse%ents, even if covered b* an obli-ated !AR", should re%ain en+oined.
/or their part, respondents espouse that the sub+ect .R" onl* covers #unreleased and unobli-ated allot%ents.# .he*
explain that once a !AR" has been issued and obli-ated b* the i%ple%entin- a-enc* concerned, the PDA/ funds
covered b* the sa%e are alread* #be*ond the reach of the .R" because the* cannot be considered as ,re%ainin-
PDA/.,# .he* conclude that this is a reasonable interpretation of the .R" b* the DBM.262
.he Court a-rees )ith petitioners in part.
At the outset, it %ust be observed that the issue of )hether or not the Court,s !epte%ber 8>, :>8= .R" should be
lifted is a %atter rendered %oot b* the present Decision. .he unconstitutionalit* of the :>8= PDA/ Article as declared
herein has the conseCuential effect of convertin- the te%porar* in+unction into a per%anent one. 2ence, fro% the
pro%ul-ation of this Decision, the release of the re%ainin- PDA/ funds for :>8=, a%on- others, is no) per%anentl*
en+oined.
.he propriet* of the DBM,s interpretation of the concept of #release# %ust, nevertheless, be resolved as it has a
practical i%pact on the execution of the current Decision. n particular, the Court %ust resolve the issue of )hether or
not PDA/ funds covered b* obli-ated !AR"s, at the ti%e this Decision is pro%ul-ated, %a* still be disbursed
follo)in- the DBM,s interpretation in DBM Circular :>8=-A.
"n this score, the Court a-rees )ith petitioners, posturin- for the funda%ental reason that funds covered b* an
obli-ated !AR" are *et to be #released# under le-al conte%plation. A !AR", as defined b* the DBM itself in its
)ebsite, is #aspecific authorit* issued to identified a-encies to incur obli-ations not exceedin- a -iven a%ount durin-
a specified period for the purpose indicated. t shall cover expenditures the release of )hich is sub+ect to co%pliance
)ith specific la)s or re-ulations, or is sub+ect to separate approval or clearance b* co%petent authorit*.#263
Based on this definition, it %a* be -leaned that a !AR" onl* evinces the existence of an obli-ation and not the
directive to pa*. Practicall* spea&in-, the !AR" does not have the direct and i%%ediate effect of placin- public funds
be*ond the control of the disbursin- authorit*. n fact, a !AR" %a* even be )ithdra)n under certain circu%stances
)hich )ill prevent the actual release of funds. "n the other hand, the actual release of funds is brou-ht about b* the
issuance of the NCA,264 )hich is subseCuent to the issuance of a !AR". As %a* be deter%ined fro% the state%ents
of the DBM representative durin- the "ral Ar-u%ents0265
$ustice Bernabe0 s the notice of allocation issued si%ultaneousl* )ith the !AR"O
x x x x
Att*. Rui40 t co%es after. .he !AR", Pour 2onor, is onl* the -o si-nal for the a-encies to obli-ate or to enter into
co%%it%ents. .he NCA, Pour 2onor, is alread* the -o si-nal to the treasur* for us to be able to pa* or to liCuidate the
a%ounts obli-ated in the !AR"F so it co%es after. x x x .he NCA, Pour 2onor, is the -o si-nal for the MD! for the
authori4ed -overn%ent-disbursin- ban&s to, therefore, pa* the pa*ees dependin- on the pro+ects or pro+ects covered
b* the !AR" and the NCA.
$ustice Bernabe0 Are there instances that !AR"s are cancelled or revo&edO
Att*. Rui40 Pour 2onor, )ould li&e to instead sub%it that there are instances that the !AR"s issued are )ithdra)n
b* the DBM.
$ustice Bernabe0 .he* are )ithdra)nO
Att*. Rui40 Pes, Pour 2onor x x x. 7E%phases and underscorin- supplied<
.hus, unless an NCA has been issued, public funds should not be treated as funds )hich have been #released.# n this
respect, therefore, the disburse%ent of :>8= PDA/ funds )hich are onl* covered b* obli-ated !AR"s, and )ithout
an* correspondin- NCAs issued, %ust, at the ti%e of this DecisionNs pro%ul-ation, be en+oined and conseCuentl*
reverted to the unappropriated surplus of the -eneral fund. Deril*, in vie) of the declared unconstitutionalit* of the
:>8= PDA/ Article, the funds appropriated pursuant thereto cannot be disbursed even thou-h alread* obli-ated, else
the Court sanctions the dealin- of funds co%in- fro% an unconstitutional source.
.his sa%e pronounce%ent %ust be eCuall* applied to 7a< the Mala%pa*a /unds )hich have been obli-ated but not
released @ %eanin-, those %erel* covered b* a !AR" @ under the phrase #and for such other purposes as %a* be
hereafter directed b* the President# pursuant to !ection A of PD 98>F and 7b< funds sourced fro% the Presidential
!ocial /und under the phrase #to finance the priorit* infrastructure develop%ent pro+ects# pursuant to !ection 8: of
PD 8A'9, as a%ended b* PD 899=, )hich )ere alto-ether declared b* the Court as unconstitutional. 2o)ever, these
funds should not be reverted to the -eneral fund as afore-stated but instead, respectivel* re%ain under the Mala%pa*a
/unds and the Presidential !ocial /und to be utili4ed for their correspondin- special purposes not other)ise declared
as unconstitutional.
E. ConseCuential Effects of Decision.
As a final point, it %ust be stressed that the Court,s pronounce%ent anent the unconstitutionalit* of 7a< the :>8=
PDA/ Article and its !pecial Provisions, 7b< all other Con-ressional Por& Barrel provisions si%ilar thereto, and 7c< the
phrases 78< #and for such other purposes as %a* be hereafter directed b* the President# under !ection A of PD 98>,
and 7:< #to finance the priorit* infrastructure develop%ent pro+ects# under !ection 8: of PD 8A'9, as a%ended b* PD
899=, %ust onl* be treated as prospective in effect in vie) of the operative fact doctrine.
.o explain, the operative fact doctrine exhorts the reco-nition that until the +udiciar*, in an appropriate case, declares
the invalidit* of a certain le-islative or executive act, such act is presu%ed constitutional and thus, entitled to
obedience and respect and should be properl* enforced and co%plied )ith. As explained in the recent case of
Co%%issioner of nternal Revenue v. !an RoCue Po)er Corporation,266 the doctrine %erel* #reflects a)areness that
precisel* because the +udiciar* is the -overn%ental or-an )hich has the final sa* on )hether or not a le-islative or
executive %easure is valid, a period of ti%e %a* have elapsed before it can exercise the po)er of +udicial revie) that
%a* lead to a declaration of nullit*. t )ould be to deprive the la) of its Cualit* of fairness and +ustice then, if there be
no reco-nition of )hat had transpired prior to such ad+udication.#267 #n the lan-ua-e of an A%erican !upre%e Court
decision0 ,.he actual existence of a statute, prior to such a deter%ination of unconstitutionalit*, is an operative fact
and %a* have conseCuences )hich cannot +ustl* be i-nored.,#268
/or these reasons, this Decision should be heretofore applied prospectivel*.
Conclusion
.he Court renders this Decision to rectif* an error )hich has persisted in the chronicles of our histor*. n the final
anal*sis, the Court %ust stri&e do)n the Por& Barrel !*ste% as unconstitutional in vie) of the inherent defects in the
rules )ithin )hich it operates. .o recount, insofar as it has allo)ed le-islators to )ield, in var*in- -radations, non-
oversi-ht, post-enact%ent authorit* in vital areas of bud-et execution, the s*ste% has violated the principle of
separation of po)ersF insofar as it has conferred unto le-islators the po)er of appropriation b* -ivin- the% personal,
discretionar* funds fro% )hich the* are able to fund specific pro+ects )hich the* the%selves deter%ine, it has
si%ilarl* violated the principle of non-dele-abilit* of le-islative po)er F insofar as it has created a s*ste% of
bud-etin- )herein ite%s are not textuali4ed into the appropriations bill, it has flouted the prescribed procedure of
present%ent and, in the process, denied the President the po)er to veto ite%s F insofar as it has diluted the
effectiveness of con-ressional oversi-ht b* -ivin- le-islators a sta&e in the affairs of bud-et execution, an aspect of
-overnance )hich the* %a* be called to %onitor and scrutini4e, the s*ste% has eCuall* i%paired public accountabilit*
F insofar as it has authori4ed le-islators, )ho are national officers, to intervene in affairs of purel* local nature, despite
the existence of capable local institutions, it has li&e)ise subverted -enuine local autono%* F and a-ain, insofar as it
has conferred to the President the po)er to appropriate funds intended b* la) for ener-*-related purposes onl* to
other purposes he %a* dee% fit as )ell as other public funds under the broad classification of #priorit* infrastructure
develop%ent pro+ects,# it has once %ore trans-ressed the principle of non-dele-abilit*.
/or as lon- as this nation adheres to the rule of la), an* of the %ultifarious unconstitutional %ethods and %echanis%s
the Court has herein pointed out should never a-ain be adopted in an* s*ste% of -overnance, b* an* na%e or for%, b*
an* se%blance or si%ilarit*, b* an* influence or effect. Disconcertin- as it is to thin& that a s*ste% so constitutionall*
unsound has %onu%entall* endured, the Court ur-es the people and its co-ste)ards in -overn%ent to loo& for)ard
)ith the opti%is% of chan-e and the a)areness of the past. At a ti%e of -reat civic unrest and vociferous public
debate, the Court ferventl* hopes that its Decision toda*, )hile it %a* not pur-e all the )ron-s of societ* nor brin-
bac& )hat has been lost, -uides this nation to the path for-ed b* the Constitution so that no one %a* heretofore detract
fro% its cause nor stra* fro% its course. After all, this is the Court,s bounden dut* and no other,s.
32ERE/"RE, the petitions are PAR.6P 1RAN.ED. n vie) of the constitutional violations discussed in this
Decision, the Court hereb* declares as BNC"N!..B."NA60 7a< the entire :>8= PDA/ ArticleF 7b< all le-al
provisions of past and present Con-ressional Por& Barrel 6a)s, such as the previous PDA/ and CD/ Articles and the
various Con-ressional nsertions, )hich authori4eJd le-islators @ )hether individuall* or collectivel* or-ani4ed into
co%%ittees @ to intervene, assu%e or participate in an* of the various post-enact%ent sta-es of the bud-et execution,
such as but not li%ited to the areas of pro+ect identification, %odification and revision of pro+ect identification, fund
release andJor fund reali-n%ent, unrelated to the po)er of con-ressional oversi-htF 7c< all le-al provisions of past and
present Con-ressional Por& Barrel 6a)s, such as the previous PDA/ and CD/ Articles and the various Con-ressional
nsertions, )hich conferJred personal, lu%p-su% allocations to le-islators fro% )hich the* are able to fund specific
pro+ects )hich the* the%selves deter%ineF 7d< all infor%al practices of si%ilar i%port and effect, )hich the Court
si%ilarl* dee%s to be acts of -rave abuse of discretion a%ountin- to lac& or excess of +urisdictionF and 7e< the phrases
78< #and for such other purposes as %a* be hereafter directed b* the President# under !ection A of Presidential Decree
No. 98> and 7:< #to finance the priorit* infrastructure develop%ent pro+ects# under !ection 8: of Presidential Decree
No. 8A'9, as a%ended b* Presidential Decree No. 899=, for both failin- the sufficient standard test in violation of the
principle of non-dele-abilit* of le-islative po)er.
Accordin-l*, the Court,s te%porar* in+unction dated !epte%ber 8>, :>8= is hereb* declared to be PERMANEN..
.hus, the disburse%entJrelease of the re%ainin- PDA/ funds allocated for the *ear :>8=, as )ell as for all previous
*ears, and the funds sourced fro% 78< the Mala%pa*a /unds under the phrase #and for such other purposes as %a* be
hereafter directed b* the President# pursuant to !ection A of Presidential Decree No. 98>, and 7:< the Presidential
!ocial /und under the phrase #to finance the priorit* infrastructure develop%ent pro+ects# pursuant to !ection 8: of
Presidential Decree No. 8A'9, as a%ended b* Presidential Decree No. 899=, )hich are, at the ti%e this Decision is
pro%ul-ated, not covered b* Notice of Cash Allocations 7NCAs< but onl* b* !pecial Allot%ent Release "rders
7!AR"s<, )hether obli-ated or not, are hereb* EN$"NED. .he re%ainin- PDA/ funds covered b* this per%anent
in+unction shall not be disbursedJreleased but instead reverted to the unappropriated surplus of the -eneral fund, )hile
the funds under the Mala%pa*a /unds and the Presidential !ocial /und shall re%ain therein to be utili4ed for their
respective special purposes not other)ise declared as unconstitutional.
"n the other hand, due to i%proper recourse and lac& of proper substantiation, the Court hereb* DENE! petitioners,
pra*er see&in- that the Executive !ecretar* andJor the Depart%ent of Bud-et and Mana-e%ent be ordered to provide
the public and the Co%%ission on Audit co%plete listsJschedules or detailed reports related to the avail%ents and
utili4ation of the funds sub+ect of these cases. Petitioners, access to official docu%ents alread* available and of public
record )hich are related to these funds %ust, ho)ever, not be prohibited but %erel* sub+ected to the custodian,s
reasonable re-ulations or an* valid statutor* prohibition on the sa%e. .his denial is )ithout pre+udice to a proper
%anda%us case )hich the* or the Co%%ission on Audit %a* choose to pursue throu-h a separate petition.
.he Court also DENE! petitioners pra*er to order the inclusion of the funds sub+ect of these cases in the bud-etar*
deliberations of Con-ress as the sa%e is a %atter left to the prero-ative of the political branches of -overn%ent.
/inall*, the Court hereb* DREC.! all prosecutorial or-ans of the -overn%ent to, )ithin the bounds of reasonable
dispatch, investi-ate and accordin-l* prosecute all -overn%ent officials andJor private individuals for possible
cri%inal offenses related to the irre-ular, i%proper andJor unla)ful disburse%entJutili4ation of all funds under the
Por& Barrel !*ste%.
.his Decision is i%%ediatel* executor* but prospective in effect.
!" "RDERED.
ESTE!A M. PER!AS8BERNABE
Associate $ustice
3E C"NCBR0
See Concurring Opinion
MARIA !OURES P. A. SERENO
Chief $ustice
See Concurring Opinion
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate $ustice
N" PAR.
PRESBITERO ". #E!ASCO, "R.
Associate $ustice
concur and also +oin the concurrin- opinion of
$ustice Carpio.
TERESITA ". !EONARO8E CASTRO
Associate $ustice
+oin the "pinion of $ustice Carpio, sub+ect to
%* Concurring & Dissenting Opinion.
ARTURO . BRION
Associate $ustice
IOSAO M. PERA!TA
Associate $ustice
!UCAS P. BERSAMIN
Associate $ustice
MARIANO C. E! CASTI!!O
Associate $ustice
+oin the concurrin- opinion of $. A... Carpio of
the ponencia
ROBERTO A. ABA
Associate $ustice
MARTIN S. #I!!ARAMA, "R.
Associate $ustice
"OSE PORTUGA! PERE$
Associate $ustice
"OSE CATRA! MENO$A
Associate $ustice
BIEN#ENIO !. RE+ES
Associate $ustice
See Concurring Opinion
MAR#IC MARIO #ICTOR ,. !EONEN
Associate $ustice
C E R . / C A . " N
certif* that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the cases )ere assi-ned to
the )riter of the opinion of the Court.
MARIA !OURES P. A. SERENO
Chief $ustice
,oo/&o/e.
XDropped as a part* per Me%orandu% dated "ctober 8;, :>8= filed b* counsel for petitioners Att*. Alfredo
B. Molo , et al. Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. =AA.
XX No part.
1 .he /ederalist Papers, /ederalist No. :>.
2 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, pp. =-(8F rollo 71.R. No. :>A?9=<, pp. =-88F and rollo 71.R. No. :>9:(8<, pp. :-A.
3 #NPor& barrel spendin-,, a ter% that traces its ori-ins bac& to the era of slaver* before the B.!. Civil 3ar,
)hen slave o)ners occasionall* )ould present a barrel of salt por& as a -ift to their slaves. n the %odern
usa-e, the ter% refers to con-ress%en scra%blin- to set aside %one* for pet pro+ects in their districts.#
7Drud-e, Michael 3. #NPor& Barrel, !pendin- E%er-in- as Presidential Ca%pai-n ssue,# Au-ust 8, :>>A
http0JJiipdi-ital.use%bass*.-ovJstJen-lishJarticleJ:>>AJ>AJ:>>A>A>88A8(>?lcnirellep
>.8:'8;8=.ht%lYax44:iLrA%2MZ Svisited "ctober 8;, :>8=W.<
4 Bernas, $oaCuin 1., !.$., .he 89A; Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines0 A Co%%entar*, :>>=
Edition, p. ;A', citin- Bernas, #/ro% Por& Barrel to Bron4e Cas&ets,# .oda*, $anuar* =>, 899?.
5 2easer, $ason, #Pulled Por&0 .he .hree Part Attac& on Non-!tatutor* Ear%ar&s,# $ournal of 6e-islation, =(
$. 6e-is. =: 7:>>9<. [http0JJheinonline.or-J2"6J6andin-Pa-eOcollection\]handle
\hein.+ournalsJ+le-=(]div\']id\]pa-e\Z 7visited "ctober 8;, :>8=<.
6 No-rales, Prospero C. and 6a-%an, Edcel C., 2ouse of Representatives of the Philippines, #Bnderstandin-
the ,Por& Barrel,,# p. :. [http0JJ))).con-ress.-ov.phJdo)nloadJ8?thJpor&^barrel.pdfZ 7visited "ctober 8;,
:>8=<.
7 Chua, Pvonne .. and Cru4, Boo%a, B., #Por& is a Political, Not A Develop%ental, .ool.#
[http0JJpci+.or-JstoriesJ:>>?Jpor&.ht%lZ Svisited "ctober ::, :>8=W.< !ee also rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, pp.
=:A-=:9.
8 Morton, $ean, #3hat is a Por& BarrelO# 1lobal 1ranar*, 6ifest*le Ma-a4ine and Co%%on Place Boo&
"nline0 !o%ethin- for Ever*one, Au-ust 89, :>8=. [http0JJ))).-lobal-ranar*.or-J:>8=J>AJ89J)hat-is-a-
por&-barrelJY.Bnrnh/Navc) Z 7visited "ctober 8;, :>8=<.
9 $ison, $ohn Ra*%ond, #3hat does the 5por& barrel5 sca% su--est about the Philippine -overn%entO#
nternational Association for Political !cience !tudents, !epte%ber 8>, :>8=. [http0JJ))).iapss.or-J
index.phpJarticlesJite%J9=-)hat-does-the-por&-barrel-sca%-su--est-about-the-philippine--overn%entZ
7visited "ctober 8;, :>8=<. !ee also 6lanes, $onathan, #Por& barrel @ Mno)in- the issue,# !unstar Ba-uio,
"ctober :=, :>8=. [http0JJ))).sunstar.co%.phJ ba-uioJopinionJ:>8=J>9J>(Jllanes-por&- barrel-&no)in--
issue-=>8(9AZ 7visited "ctober 8;, :>8=<.
10 Entitled #AN AC. MAMN1 APPR"PRA."N! /"R PBB6C 3"RM!,# approved on March 8>, 89::.
11 #Act =>??, the first por& barrel appropriation, essentiall* divided public )or&s pro+ects into t)o t*pes. .he
first t*peUnational and other buildin-s, roads and brid-es in provinces, and li-hthouses, buo*s and beacons,
and necessar* %echanical eCuip%ent of li-hthousesUfell directl* under the +urisdiction of the director of
public )or&s, for )hich his office received appropriations. .he second -roupUpolice barrac&s, nor%al school
and other public buildin-s, and certain t*pes of roads and brid-es, artesian )ells, )harves, piers and other
shore protection )or&s, and cable, tele-raph, and telephone linesUis the forerunner of the infa%ous por&
barrel. Althou-h the pro+ects fallin- under the second t*pe )ere to be distributed at the discretion of the
secretar* of co%%erce and co%%unications, he needed prior approval fro% a +oint co%%ittee elected b* the
!enate and 2ouse of Representatives. .he nod of either the +oint co%%ittee or a co%%ittee %e%ber it had
authori4ed )as also reCuired before the co%%erce and co%%unications secretar* could transfer unspent
portions of one ite% to another ite%.# 7E%phases supplied< 7Chua, Pvonne .. and Cru4, Boo%a, B., #Por& b*
an* na%e,# DERA /iles, Au-ust :=, :>8=. [http0JJverafiles.or-Jpor&-b*-an*-na%eJZ Svisited "ctober 8?,
:>8=W<.
12 !ec. =. .he su%s appropriated in para-raphs 7c<, 7-<, 7l<, and 7s< of this Act shall be available for i%%ediate
expenditure b* the Director of Public 3or&s, but those appropriated in the other para-raphs shall be
distributed in the discretion of the !ecretar* of Co%%erce and Co%%unications, sub+ect to the approval of a
+oint co%%ittee elected b* the !enate and the 2ouse of Representatives. .he co%%ittee fro% each 2ouse
%a* authori4e one of its %e%bers to approve the distribution %ade b* the !ecretar* of Co%%erce and
Co%%unications, )ho )ith the approval of said +oint co%%ittee, or of the authori4ed %e%bers thereof %a*,
for the purposes of said distribution, transfer unexpended portions of an* ite% of appropriation. 7E%phases
supplied<
13 .hose !ection 8 7c<, 7-<, 7l<, and 7s< of Act =>?? #shall be available for i%%ediate expenditure b* the
Director of Public 3or&s.#
14 !ection =, Act =>??.
15 Chua, Pvonne .. and Cru4, Boo%a, B., #Por& b* an* na%e,# DERA /iles, Au-ust :=, :>8=.
[http0JJverafiles.or-Jpor&-b*-an*-na%eJZ 7visited "ctober 8?, :>8=<.
16 d.
17 d.
18 d.
19 No-rales, Prospero C. and 6a-%an, Edcel C., 2ouse of Representatives of the Philippines, #Bnderstandin-
the ,Por& Barrel,,# [http0JJ))).con-ress.-ov.phJdo)nloadJ 8?thJpor&^barrel.pdf Z 7visited "ctober 8;,
:>8=<.
20 Chua, Pvonne .. and Cru4, Boo%a, B., #Por& b* an* na%e,# DERA /iles, Au-ust :=, :>8=.
[http0JJverafiles.or-Jpor&-b*-an*-na%eJZ 7visited "ctober 8?, :>8=<.
21 d.
22 Priorit* Develop%ent Assistance /und 7PDA/< and Darious nfrastructures includin- 6ocal Pro+ects
7D6P<, !pecial Audits "ffice Report No. :>8:->=, Au-ust 8?, :>8= 7CoA Report<, p. :.
23 la-an, Marol, #Data A Da*F CA, CD/, PDA/O Por& is por& is por&,# Mone*politics, A Date $ournalis%
Pro+ect for the Philippine Center for nvesti-ative $ournalis%, Au-ust 8, :>8=
[http0JJ%one*politics.pci+.or-Jdata-a-da*Jcia-cdf-pdaf-por&-is-por&-is-por&JZ 7visited "ctober 8?, :>8=<.
24 Republic Act No. 7RA< 'A=8.
25 !pecial Provision 8, Article T6D, RA ;>;A 78998 CD/ Article<, and !pecial Provision 8, Article T6
7899:<, RA ;8A> 7899: CD/ Article< are si%ilarl* )orded as follo)s0 !pecial Provision 8.
Bse and Release of /unds. .he a%ount herein appropriated shall be used for infrastructure and other
priorit* pro+ects and activities upon approval b* the President of the Philippines and shall be released
directl* to the appropriate i%ple%entin- a-enc* S7x x x for 8998<W, sub+ect to the sub%ission of the
reCuired list of pro+ects and activities. 7E%phases supplied<
26 Chua, Pvonne .. and Cru4, Boo%a, B., #Por& b* an* na%e,# DERA /iles, Au-ust :=, :>8=.
[http0JJverafiles.or-Jpor&-b*-an*-na%eJZ 7visited "ctober 8?, :>8=<.
27 d.
28 !pecial Provision 8, Article TTTD, RA ;'?( 7899= CD/ Article< provides0
!pecial Provision
8. Bse and Release of /unds.
.he a%ount herein appropriated shall be used for infrastructure and other priorit* pro+ects and
activities as proposed and identified b* officials concerned accordin- to the follo)in- allocations0
Representatives, P8:,(>>,>>> eachF !enators P8A,>>>,>>> eachF Dice-President, P:>,>>>,>>>. .he
fund shall be auto%aticall* released Cuarterl* b* )a* of Advice of Allot%ent and Notice of Cash
Allocation directl* to the assi-ned i%ple%entin- a-enc* not later than five 7(< da*s after the
be-innin- of each Cuarter upon sub%ission of the list of pro+ects and activities b* the officials
concerned. 7E%phases supplied<
29 !ee !pecial Provision 8, 899= CD/ ArticleF id.
30 !pecial Provision 8, Article T6, RA ;''= 7899? CD/ Article< provides0
!pecial Provisions
8. Bse and Release of /unds.
.he a%ount herein appropriated shall be used for infrastructure, purchase of a%bulances and
co%puters and other priorit* pro+ects and activities, and credit facilities to Cualified beneficiaries as
proposed and identified b* officials concerned accordin- to the follo)in- allocations0
Representatives,P8:,(>>,>>> eachF !enators P8A,>>>,>>> eachF Dice-President, P:>,>>>,>>>F
PR"DDED, .hat, the said credit facilities shall be constituted as a revolvin- fund to be ad%inistered
b* a -overn%ent financial institution 71/< as a trust fund for lendin- operations. Prior *ears releases
to local -overn%ent units and national -overn%ent a-encies for this purpose shall be turned over to
the -overn%ent financial institution )hich shall be the sole ad%inistrator of credit facilities released
fro% this fund.
.he fund shall be auto%aticall* released Cuarterl* b* )a* of Advice of Allot%ents and Notice of
Cash Allocation directl* to the assi-ned i%ple%entin- a-enc* not later than five 7(< da*s after the
be-innin- of each Cuarter upon sub%ission of the list of pro+ects and activities b* the officials
concerned. 7E%phases supplied<
31 !pecial Provision 8, Article T6, RA ;A?( 7899( CD/ Article< provides0
!pecial Provisions
8. Bse and Release of /unds.
.he a%ount herein appropriated shall be used for infrastructure, purchase of eCuip%ent and other
priorit* pro+ects and activities as proposed and identified b* officials concerned accordin- to the
follo)in- allocations0 Representatives, P8:,(>>,>>> eachF !enators P8A,>>>,>>> eachF Dice-
President, P:>,>>>,>>>.
.he fund shall be auto%aticall* released se%i-annuall* b* )a* of Advice of Allot%ent and Notice of
Cash Allocation directl* to the desi-nated i%ple%entin- a-enc* not later than five 7(< da*s after the
be-innin- of each se%ester upon sub%ission of the list of pro+ects and activities b* the officials
concerned. 7E%phases supplied<
32 !pecial Provision 8, Article T6, RA A8;? 7899' CD/ Article< provides0
!pecial Provisions
8. Bse and Release of /und.
.he a%ount herein appropriated shall be used for infrastructure, purchase of eCuip%ent and other
priorit* pro+ects and activities, includin- current operatin- expenditures, except creation of ne)
plantilla positions, as proposed and identified b* officials concerned accordin- to the follo)in-
allocations0 Representatives, .)elve Million /ive 2undred .housand Pesos 7P8:,(>>,>>>< eachF
!enators, Ei-hteen Million Pesos 7P8A,>>>,>>>< eachF Dice-President, .)ent* Million Pesos
7P:>,>>>,>>><.
.he /und shall be released se%i-annuall* b* )a* of !pecial Allot%ent Release "rder and Notice of
Cash Allocation directl* to the desi-nated i%ple%entin- a-enc* not later than thirt* 7=>< da*s after
the be-innin- of each se%ester upon sub%ission of the list of pro+ects and activities b* the officials
concerned. 7E%phases supplied<
33 !pecial Provision : of the 899? CD/ Article, !pecial Provision : of the 899( CD/ Article and !pecial
Provision : of the 899' CD/ Article are si%ilarl* )orded as follo)s0
:. !ub%ission of SLuarterl* 7899?<J!e%i-Annual 7899( and 899'<W Reports. .he Depart%ent of
Bud-et and Mana-e%ent shall sub%it )ithin thirt* 7=>< da*s after the end of each SCuarter
7899?<Jse%ester 7899( and 899'<W a report to the 2ouse Co%%ittee on Appropriations and the !enate
Co%%ittee on /inance on the releases %ade fro% this /und. .he report shall include the listin- of the
pro+ects, locations, i%ple%entin- a-encies Sstated 7order of co%%ittees interchan-ed in 899? and
899'<W and the endorsin- officials. 7E%phases supplied<
34 !pecial Provision :, Article T6, RA A:(> 7899; CD/ Article< provides0
!pecial Provisions
x x x x
:. Publication of Countr*)ide Develop%ent /und Pro+ects. 3ithin thirt* 7=>< da*s after the si-nin-
of this Act into la), the Me%bers of Con-ress and the Dice-President shall, in consultation )ith the
i%ple%entin- a-enc* concerned, sub%it to the Depart%ent of Bud-et and Mana-e%ent the list of
fift* percent 7(>E< of pro+ects to be funded fro% the allocation fro% the Countr*)ide Develop%ent
/und )hich shall be dul* endorsed b* the !enate President and the Chair%an of the Co%%ittee on
/inance in the case of the !enate and the !pea&er of the 2ouse of Representatives and the Chair%an
of the Co%%ittee on Appropriations in the case of the 2ouse of Representatives, and the re%ainin-
fift* percent 7(>E< )ithin six 7'< %onths thereafter. .he list shall identif* the specific pro+ects,
location, i%ple%entin- a-encies, and tar-et beneficiaries and shall be the basis for the release of
funds. .he said list shall be published in a ne)spaper of -eneral circulation b* the Depart%ent of
Bud-et and Mana-e%ent. No funds appropriated herein shall be disbursed for pro+ects not included
in the list herein reCuired. 7E%phases supplied<
35 !ee !pecial Provision :, 899; CD/ ArticleF id.
36 !pecial Provision :, Article T6, RA A(:: 7899A CD/ Article< provides0
!pecial Provisions
x x x x
:. Publication of Countr*)ide Develop%ent /und Pro+ects. x x x PR"DDED, .hat said publication
is not a reCuire%ent for the release of funds. x x x x 7E%phases supplied<
37 Chua, Pvonne .. and Cru4, Boo%a, B., #Por& b* an* na%e,# DERA /iles, Au-ust :=, :>8=.
[http0JJverafiles.or-Jpor&-b*-an*-na%eJZ 7visited "ctober 8?, :>8=<.
38 d.
49 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, pp. ==(-==', citin- ParreGo, Earl, #Perils of Por&,# Philippine Center for
nvesti-ative $ournalis%, $une =-?, 899A. Available at [http0JJpci+.or-JstoriesJ899AJpor&.ht%lZ
40 d.
41 d.
42 RA A;?( entitled #AN AC. APPR"PRA.N1 /BND! /"R .2E "PERA."N "/ .2E
1"DERNMEN. "/ .2E REPBB6C "/ .2E P26PPNE! /R"M $ANBARP "NE ." DECEMBER
.2R.P "NE, NNE.EEN 2BNDRED NNE.P NNE, AND /"R ".2ER PBRP"!E!.#
43 !pecial Provision 8, Article T6, /ood !ecurit* Pro-ra% /und, RA A;?( provides0
!pecial Provision
8. Bse and Release of /und. .he a%ount herein authori4ed shall be used to support the /ood !ecurit*
Pro-ra% of the -overn%ent, )hich shall include far%-to-%ar&et roads, post harvest facilities and
other a-ricultural related infrastructures. Releases fro% this fund shall be %ade directl* to the
i%ple%entin- a-enc* sub+ect to prior consultation )ith the Me%bers of Con-ress concerned.
7E%phases supplied<
44 !pecial Provision 8, Article T6T,
6in-ap Para sa Mahihirap
Pro-ra% /und, RA A;?( provides0
!pecial Provision
8. Bse and Release of /und. .he a%ount herein appropriated for the 6in-ap Para sa Mahihirap
Pro-ra% /und shall be used exclusivel* to satisf* the %ini%u% basic needs of poor co%%unities and
disadvanta-ed sectors0 PR"DDED, .hat such a%ount shall be released directl* to the i%ple%entin-
a-enc* upon prior consultation )ith the Me%bers of Con-ress concerned. 7E%phases supplied<
45 !pecial Provision 8, Article 6, RuralJBrban Develop%ent nfrastructure Pro-ra% /und, RA A;?( provides0
!pecial Provision
8. Bse and Release of /und. .he a%ount herein authori4ed shall be used to fund infrastructure
reCuire%ents of the ruralJurban areas )hich shall be released directl* to the i%ple%entin- a-enc*
upon prior consultation )ith the respective Me%bers of Con-ress. 7E%phases supplied<
46 !pecial Provision 8, Article T6T, RA A;'> 7:>>> PDA/ Article< provides0
!pecial Provision
8. Bse and release of the /und. .he a%ount herein appropriated shall be used to fund priorit*
pro-ra%s and pro+ects as indicated under Purpose 80 PR"DDED, .hat such a%ount shall be released
directl* to the i%ple%entin- a-enc* concerned upon prior consultation )ith the respective
Representative of the District0 PR"DDED, /BR.2ER, .hat the herein allocation %a* be reali-ned
as necessar* to an* expense cate-or*0 PR"DDED, /NA66P, .hat no a%ount shall be used to fund
personal services and other personal benefits. 7E%phases supplied<
47 !ee !pecial Provision 8, :>>> PDA/ ArticleF id.
48 !ection :( 7;<, Article D, of the 89A; Philippine Constitution 789A; Constitution< provides that
#if, b* the end of an* fiscal *ear, the Con-ress shall have failed to pass the -eneral appropriations bill
for the ensuin- fiscal *ear, the -eneral appropriations la) for the precedin- fiscal *ear shall be
dee%ed reenacted and shall re%ain in force and effect until the -eneral appropriations bill is passed
b* the Con-ress.# 7E%phasis supplied<
49 !pecial Provision 8, Article 6, RA 98': 7:>>: PDA/ Article< provides0
8. Bse and Release of the /und. .he a%ount herein appropriated shall be used to fund priorit*
pro-ra%s and pro+ects or to fund counterpart for forei-n-assisted pro-ra%s and pro+ects0
PR"DDED, .hat such a%ount shall be released directl* to the i%ple%entin- a-enc* or 6ocal
1overn%ent Bnit concerned. 7E%phases supplied<
50 !pecial Provision 8, Article T6D, RA 9:>', :>>= 1AA 7:>>= PDA/ Article< provides0
!pecial Provision
8. Bse and Release of the /und. .he a%ount herein appropriated shall be used to fund priorit*
pro-ra%s and pro+ects or to fund the reCuired counterpart for forei-n-assisted pro-ra%s and pro+ects0
PR"DDED, .hat such a%ount shall be released directl* to the i%ple%entin- a-enc* or 6ocal
1overn%ent Bnit concerned0 PR"DDED, /BR.2ER, .hat the allocations authori4ed herein %a* be
reali-ned to an* expense class, if dee%ed necessar*0 PR"DDED, /BR.2ERM"RE, .hat a
%axi%u% of ten percent 78>E< of the authori4ed allocations b* district %a* be used for the
procure%ent of rice and other basic co%%odities )hich shall be purchased fro% the National /ood
Authorit*.
51 !pecial Provision 8, Article TD, RA 9:>' provides0
!pecial Provision No. 8 @ Restriction on the Dele-ation of Pro+ect %ple%entation .he
i%ple%entation of the pro+ects funded herein shall not be dele-ated to other a-encies, except those
pro+ects to be i%ple%ented b* the En-ineerin- Bri-ades of the A/P and inter-depart%ent pro+ects
underta&en b* other offices and a-encies includin- local -overn%ent units )ith de%onstrated
capabilit* to actuall* i%ple%ent the pro+ects b* the%selves upon consultation )ith the Me%bers of
Con-ress concerned. n all cases the DP32 shall exercise technical supervision over pro+ects.
7E%phasis supplied<
52 !pecial Provision =, Article T6, RA 9:>' provides0
!pecial Provision No. = @ !ub%ission of the 6ist of !chool Buildin-s 3ithin => da*s after the
si-nin- of this Act into la), 7DepEd< after consultation )ith the representative of the le-islative
district concerned, shall sub%it to DBM the list of (>E of school buildin-s to be constructed ever*
%unicipalit* x x x. .he list as sub%itted shall be the basis for the release of funds. 7E%phasis
supplied<
53 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. ((;.
54 !pecial Provision 8, Article 6, RA 9==' 7:>>( PDA/ Article< provides0
!pecial Provision7s<
8. Bse and Release of the /und. .he a%ount appropriated herein shall be used to fund priorit*
pro-ra%s and pro+ects under the ten point a-enda of the national -overn%ent and shall be released
directl* to the i%ple%entin- a-encies as indicated hereunder, to )it0
PARTICU!ARS PROGRAM>PRO"ECT IMP!EMENTING
AGENC+
A. Education Purchase of . ECuip%ent DepEdJ.E!DAJ
C2EDJ!BCsJ61Bs

!cholarship .E!DAJC2EDJ
!BCsJ61Bs
B. 2ealth Assistance to ndi-ent Patients Confined at the 2ospitals
Bnder D"2 ncludin- !pecialt* 2ospitals
D"2J!pecialt*
2ospitals

Assistance to ndi-ent Patients at the 2ospitals Devolved
to 61Bs and R2Bs
61Bs

nsurance Pre%iu% Philhealth
C. 6ivelihoodJ
CD!!
!%all ] Mediu% EnterpriseJ6ivelihood D.J.6RCJDAJCDA

Co%prehensive nte-rated Deliver* of !ocial !ervices D!3D
D. Rural
Electrification
Baran-a*JRural Electrification D"EJNEA
E. 3ater !uppl* Construction of 3ater !*ste% DP32

nstallation of PipesJPu%psJ.an&s 61Bs
/. /inancial
Assistance
!pecific Pro-ra%s and Pro+ects to Address the Pro-Poor
Pro-ra%s of 1overn%ent
61Bs
1. Public 3or& ConstructionJRepairJ Rehabilitation of the follo)in-0
Roads and Brid-esJ/lood ControlJ!chool buildin-s
2ospitals 2ealth /acilitiesJPublic Mar&etsJMulti-Purpose
Buildin-sJMulti-Purpose Pave%ents
DP32
2. rri-ation ConstructionJRepairJ Rehabilitation of rri-ation
/acilities
DA-NA
7E%phasis supplied<
55 d.
56 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. ((A.
57 !ee !pecial Provision 8, Article T6D, RA 9?>8.
58 !ee !pecial Provision 8, Article T6D, RA 9?9A.
59 !ee !pecial Provision 8, Article T6T, RA 9(:?.
60 !ee !pecial Provision 8, Article T6D, RA 99;>.
61 /or instance, !pecial Provisions : and =, Article T6, RA 9==' providin- for the :>>( DepEd !chool
Buildin- Pro-ra%, and !pecial Provisions 8 and 8', Article TD, RA 9?>8 providin- for the :>>; DP32
Re-ular Bud-et respectivel* state0 :>>( DepEd !chool Buildin- Pro-ra% !pecial Provision No. : @
Allocation of !chool Buildin-s0 .he a%ount allotted under Purpose 8 shall be apportioned as follo)s0 78<
fift* percent 7(>E< to be allocated pro-rata accordin- to each le-islative districts student population x x xF 7:<
fort* percent 7?>E< to be allocated onl* a%on- those le-islative districts )ith classroo% shorta-es x x xF 7=<
ten percent 78>E< to be allocated in accordance x x x.
!pecial Provision No. = @ !ub%ission of the 6ist of !chool Buildin-s0 3ithin => da*s after the
si-nin- of this Act into la), the DepEd after consultation )ith the representative of the le-islative
districts concerned, shall sub%it to DBM the list of fift* percent 7(>E< of school buildin-s to be
constructed in ever* %unicipalit* x x x. .he list as sub%itted shall be the basis for the release of
funds x x x. 7E%phases supplied<
:>>; DP32 Re-ular Bud-et
!pecial Provision No. 8 @ Restriction on Dele-ation of Pro+ect %ple%entation0 .he i%ple%entation
of the pro+ect funded herein shall not be dele-ated to other a-encies, except those pro+ects to be
i%ple%ented b* the A/P Corps of En-ineers, and inter-depart%ent pro+ects to be underta&en b* other
offices and a-encies, includin- local -overn%ent units 761Bs< )ith de%onstrated capabilit* to
actuall* i%ple%ent the pro+ect b* the%selves upon consultation )ith the representative of the
le-islative district concerned x x x.
!pecial Provision No. 8' @ Reali-n%ent of /unds0 .he !ecretar* of Public 3or&s and 2i-h)a*s is
authori4ed to reali-n funds released fro% appropriations x x x fro% one pro+ectJscope of )or& to
another0 PR"DDED, that x x x 7iii< the reCuest is )ith the concurrence of the le-islator concerned
x x x. 7E%phasis supplied<
62 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''< , p. ((9, citin- !ection :.A of RA 9=(A, other)ise &no)n as the #!upple%ental
Bud-et for :>>'.#
63 d. at ((9-('>.
64 #As a pri%ar* aspect of the Philippine 1overn%ent5s public procure%ent refor% a-enda, the 1overn%ent
Procure%ent Polic* Board 71PPB< )as established b* virtue of Republic Act No. 98A? 7R.A. 98A?< as an
independent inter-a-enc* bod* that is i%partial, transparent and effective, )ith private sector representation.
As established in !ection '= of R.A. 98A?, the 1PPB shall have the follo)in- duties and responsibilities0 8.
.o protect national interest in all %atters affectin- public procure%ent, havin- due re-ard to the countr*5s
re-ional and international obli-ationsF :. .o for%ulate and a%end public procure%ent policies, rules and
re-ulations, and a%end, )henever necessar*, the i%ple%entin- rules and re-ulations Part A 7RR-A<F =. .o
prepare a -eneric procure%ent %anual and standard biddin- for%s for procure%entF ?. .o ensure the proper
i%ple%entation b* the procurin- entities of the Act, its RR-A and all other relevant rules and re-ulations
pertainin- to public procure%entF (. .o establish a sustainable trainin- pro-ra% to develop the capacit* of
1overn%ent procure%ent officers and e%plo*ees, and to ensure the conduct of re-ular procure%ent trainin-
pro-ra%s b* the procurin- entitiesF and '. .o conduct an annual revie) of the effectiveness of the Act and
reco%%end an* a%end%ents thereto, as %a* be necessar*.
x x x x# [http0JJ))).-ppb.-ov.phJabout^usJ-ppb.ht%lZ 7visited "ctober :=, :>8=<.
65 Entitled #AMENDMEN. "/ !EC."N (= "/ .2E MP6EMEN.N1 RB6E! AND RE1B6A."N!
PAR. A "/ REPBB6C AC. 98A? AND PRE!CRBN1 1BDE6NE! "N PAR.CPA."N "/ N"N-
1"DERNMEN.A6 "R1AN_A."N! N PBB6C PR"CBREMEN.,# approved $une :9, :>>;.
66 Entitled #AN AC. PR"DDN1 /"R .2E M"DERN_A."N, !.ANDARD_A."N AND
RE1B6A."N "/ .2E PR"CBREMEN. AC.D.E! "/ .2E 1"DERNMEN. AND /"R ".2ER
PBRP"!E!.#
67 !ec. ?A. Alternative Methods. - !ub+ect to the prior approval of the 2ead of the Procurin- Entit* or his dul*
authori4ed representative, and )henever +ustified b* the conditions provided in this Act, the Procurin- Entit*
%a*, in order to pro%ote econo%* and efficienc*, resort to an* of the follo)in- alternative %ethods of
Procure%ent0
x x x x
7e< Ne-otiated Procure%ent - a %ethod of Procure%ent that %a* be resorted under the extraordinar*
circu%stances provided for in !ection (= of this Act and other instances that shall be specified in the
RR, )hereb* the Procurin- Entit* directl* ne-otiates a contract )ith a technicall*, le-all* and
financiall* capable supplier, contractor or consultant.
x x x x
68 As defined in !ection (7o< of RA 98A?, the ter% #Procurin- Entit*# refers to an* branch, depart%ent,
office, a-enc*, or instru%entalit* of the -overn%ent, includin- state universities and colle-es, -overn%ent-
o)ned andJor - controlled corporations, -overn%ent financial institutions, and local -overn%ent units
procurin- 1oods, Consultin- !ervices and nfrastructure Pro+ects.
69 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. ('?, citin- 1PPB Resolution 8:-:>>;.
70 !pecial Provision :, Article T6D, RA 8>8?; 7:>88 PDA/ Article< provides0
:. Allocation of /unds. .he total pro+ects to be identified b* le-islators and the Dice-President shall
not exceed the follo)in- a%ounts0
a. .otal of !event* Million Pesos 7P;>,>>>,>>>< bro&en do)n into /ort* Million Pesos 7P?>,>>>,>>><
for nfrastructure Pro+ects and .hirt* Million Pesos 7P=>,>>>,>>>< for soft pro+ects of Con-ressional
Districts or Part* 6ist RepresentativesF
b. .otal of .)o 2undred Million Pesos 7P:>>,>>>,>>>< bro&en do)n into "ne 2undred Million
Pesos 7P8>>,>>>,>>>< for nfrastructure Pro+ects and "ne 2undred Million Pesos 7P8>>,>>>,>>>< for
soft pro+ects of !enators and the Dice President.
71 !ee !pecial Provision ?, :>88 PDA/ Article.
72 !pecial Provision :, Article T6D, RA 8>8(( 7:>8: PDA/ Article< provides0 :. Pro+ect dentification.
dentification of pro+ects andJor desi-nation of beneficiaries shall confor% to the priorit* list, standard or
desi-n prepared b* each i%ple%entin- a-enc*. /urther%ore, preference shall be -iven to pro+ects located in
the ?th to 'th class %unicipalities or indi-ents identified under the National 2ousehold .ar-etin- !*ste% for
Povert* Reduction b* the D!3D.
/or this purpose, the i%ple%entin- a-enc* shall sub%it to Con-ress said priorit* list, standard or
desi-n )ithin ninet* 79>< da*s fro% effectivit* of this Act. 7E%phasis supplied<
73 RA 8>=(:, passed and approved b* Con-ress on Dece%ber 89, :>8: and si-ned into la) b* the President
on Dece%ber 89, :>8:. !pecial Provision :, Article T6D, RA 8>=(: 7:>8= PDA/ Article< provides0
:. Pro+ect dentification. dentification of pro+ects andJor desi-nation of beneficiaries shall confor%
to the priorit* list, standard or desi-n prepared b* each i%ple%entin- a-enc*0 PR"DDED, .hat
preference shall be -iven to pro+ects located in the ?th to 'th class %unicipalities or indi-ents
identified under the N2.!-PR b* the D!3D. /or this purpose, the i%ple%entin- a-enc* shall
sub%it to Con-ress said priorit* list, standard or desi-n )ithin ninet* 79>< da*s fro% effectivit* of
this Act. 7E%phasis supplied<
74 .he per%issive treat%ent of the priorit* list reCuire%ent in practice )as revealed durin- the "ral
Ar-u%ents 7.!N, "ctober 8>, :>8=, p. 8?=<0
$ustice 6eonen0 x x x n !ection : %eanin-, !pecial Provision :, it %entions priorit* list of
i%ple%entin- a-encies. 2ave the i%ple%entin- a-encies indeed presented priorit* list to the
Me%bers of Con-ress before disburse%entO
!olicitor 1eneral $ardele4a0 M* understandin- is, is not reall*, Pour 2onor. $ustice 6eonen0 !o, in
other )ords, the PDA/ )as expended )ithout the priorit* list reCuire%ents of the i%ple%entin-
a-enciesO
!olicitor 1eneral $ardele4a0 .hat is so %uch in the CoA Report, Pour 2onor.
75 !ee !pecial Provision = of the :>8: PDA/ Article and !pecial Provision = of the :>8= PDA/ Article.
76 !pecial Provision ' of the :>8: PDA/ Article provides0
'. Reali-n%ent of /unds. Reali-n%ent under this /und %a* onl* be allo)ed once. .he !ecretaries of
A-riculture, Education, Ener-*, Environ%ent and Natural Resources, 2ealth, nterior and 6ocal
1overn%ent, Public 3or&s and 2i-h)a*s, and !ocial 3elfare and Develop%ent are also authori4ed
to approve reali-n%ent fro% one pro+ectJscope to another )ithin the allot%ent received fro% this
/und, sub+ect to the follo)in-0 7i< for infrastructure pro+ects, reali-n%ent is )ithin the sa%e
i%ple%entin- unit and sa%e pro+ect cate-or* as the ori-inal pro+ectF 7ii< allot%ent released has not
*et been obli-ated for the ori-inal pro+ectJscope of )or&F and 7iii< reCuest is )ith the concurrence of
the le-islator concerned. .he DBM %ust be infor%ed in )ritin- of an* reali-n%ent approved )ithin
five 7(< calendar da*s fro% its approval.
!pecial Provision ? of the :>8= PDA/ Article provides0
?. Reali-n%ent of /unds. Reali-n%ent under this /und %a* onl* be allo)ed once. .he !ecretaries of
A-riculture, Education, Ener-*, nterior and 6ocal 1overn%ent, 6abor and E%plo*%ent, Public
3or&s and 2i-h)a*s, !ocial 3elfare and Develop%ent and .rade and ndustr* are also authori4ed to
approve reali-n%ent fro% one pro+ectJscope to another )ithin the allot%ent received fro% this /und,
sub+ect to the follo)in-0 7i< for infrastructure pro+ects, reali-n%ent is )ithin the sa%e i%ple%entin-
unit and sa%e pro+ect cate-or* as the ori-inal pro+ectF 7ii< allot%ent released has not *et been
obli-ated for the ori-inal pro+ectJscope of )or&F and 7iii< reCuest is )ith the concurrence of the
le-islator concerned. .he DBM %ust be infor%ed in )ritin- of an* reali-n%ent approved )ithin five
7(< calendar da*s fro% approval thereof0 PR"DDED, .hat an* reali-n%ent under this /und shall be
li%ited )ithin the sa%e classification of soft or hard pro-ra%sJpro+ects listed under !pecial Provision
8 hereof0 PR"DDED, /BR.2ER, .hat in case of reali-n%ents, %odifications and revisions of
pro+ects to be i%ple%ented b* 61Bs, the 61B concerned shall certif* that the cash has not *et been
disbursed and the funds have been deposited bac& to the B.r.
An* reali-n%ent, %odification and revision of the pro+ect identification shall be sub%itted to the
2ouse Co%%ittee on Appropriations and the !enate Co%%ittee on /inance, for favorable
endorse%ent to the DBM or the i%ple%entin- a-enc*, as the case %a* be. 7E%phases supplied<
77 !pecial Provision 8 of the :>8= PDA/ Article provides0
!pecial Provision7s< 8. Bse of /und. .he a%ount appropriated herein shall be used to fund the
follo)in- priorit* pro-ra%s and pro+ects to be i%ple%ented b* the correspondin- a-encies0
x x x x
PR"DDED, .hat this /und shall not be used for the pa*%ent of Personal !ervices expenditures0
PR"DDED, /BR.2ER, .hat all procure%ent shall co%pl* )ith the provisions of R.A. No. 98A?
and its Revised %ple%entin- Rules and Re-ulations0 PR"DDED, /NA66P, .hat for infrastructure
pro+ects, 61Bs %a* onl* be identified as i%ple%entin- a-encies if the* have the technical capabilit*
to i%ple%ent the sa%e. 7E%phasis supplied<
78 !pecial Provision : of the :>8= PDA/ Article provides0
:. Pro+ect dentification. x x x.
x x x x
All pro-ra%sJpro+ects, except for assistance to indi-ent patients and scholarships, identified b* a
%e%ber of the 2ouse of Representatives outside of hisJher le-islative district shall have the )ritten
concurrence of the %e%ber of the 2ouse of Representatives of the recipient or beneficiar* le-islative
district, endorsed b* the !pea&er of the 2ouse of Representatives.
79 !ee !pecial Provision ? of the :>8= PDA/ ArticleF supra note ;'.
80 !ec. A.
Appropriations. .he su% of /ive Million Pesos out of an* available funds fro% the National .reasur*
is hereb* appropriated and authori4ed to be released for the or-ani4ation of the Board and its initial
operations. 2enceforth, funds sufficient to full* carr* out the functions and ob+ectives of the Board
shall be appropriated ever* fiscal *ear in the 1eneral Appropriations Act.
All fees, revenues and receipts of the Board fro% an* and all sources includin- receipts fro% service
contracts and a-ree%ents such as application and processin- fees, si-nature bonus, discover* bonus,
production bonusF all %one* collected fro% concessionaires, representin- unspent )or& obli-ations,
fines and penalties under the Petroleu% Act of 89?9F as )ell as the -overn%ent share representin-
ro*alties, rentals, production share on service contracts and si%ilar pa*%ents on the exploration,
develop%ent and exploitation of ener-* resources, shall for% part of a !pecial /und to be used to
finance ener-* resource develop%ent and exploitation pro-ra%s and pro+ects of the -overn%ent and
for such other purposes as %a* be hereafter directed b* the President. 7E%phasis supplied<
81 Entitled #CREA.N1 AN ENER1P DEDE6"PMEN. B"ARD, DE/NN1 .! P"3ER! AND
/BNC."N!, PR"DDN1 /BND!, .2ERE/"R, AND /"R ".2ER PBRP"!E!.#
82 !ee /irst 3hereas Clause of PD 98>.
83 !ee [http0JJ%ala%pa*a.co%JZ 7visited "ctober 8;, :>8=<.
84 !ec. 8:. !pecial Condition of /ranchise. U After deductin- five 7(E< percent as /ranchise .ax, the /ift*
7(>E< percent share of the 1overn%ent in the a--re-ate -ross earnin-s of the Corporation fro% this
/ranchise shall be i%%ediatel* set aside and allocated to fund the follo)in- infrastructure and socio-civil
pro+ects )ithin the Metropolitan Manila Area0
7a< /lood Control
7b< !e)era-e and !e)a-e
7c< Nutritional Control
7d< Population Control
7e< .ulun-an n- Ba*an Centers
7f< Beautification
7-< Milusan- Mabuha*an at Maunlaran 7MMM< pro+ectsF provided, that should the a--re-ate -ross
earnin- be less than P8(>,>>>,>>>.>>, the a%ount to be allocated to fund the above-%entioned
pro+ect shall be eCuivalent to sixt* 7'>E< percent of the a--re-ate -ross earnin-.
n addition to the priorit* infrastructure and socio-civic pro+ects )ith the Metropolitan Manila
specificall* enu%erated above, the share of the 1overn%ent in the a--re-ate -ross earnin-s derived
b* the Corporate fro% this /ranchise %a* also be appropriated and allocated to fund and finance
infrastructure andJor socio-civic pro+ects throu-hout the Philippines as %a* be directed and
authori4ed b* the "ffice of the President of the Philippines.
85 Entitled #C"N!"6DA.N1 AND AMENDN1 PRE!DEN.A6 DECREE N"!. 8>';-A, 8>';-B,
8>';-C, 8=99 AND 8'=:, RE6A.DE ." .2E /RANC2!E AND P"3ER! "/ .2E P26PPNE
AMB!EMEN. AND 1AMN1 C"RP"RA."N 7PA1C"R<.#
86 Entitled #AMENDN1 !EC."N .3E6DE "/ PRE!DEN.A6 DECREE N". 8A'9-
C"N!"6DA.N1 AND AMENDN1 PRE!DEN.A6 DECREE N"!. 8>';-A, 8>';-B, 8>';-C, 8=99
AND 8'=:, R E6A.DE ." .2E / RANC2!E AND P"3ER! "/ .2E P26PPNE AMB!EMEN.
AND 1 AMN1 C"RP"RA."N 7PA1C"R<.# 3hile the parties have confined their discussion to !ection
8: of PD 8A'9, the Court ta&es +udicial notice of its a%end%ent and perforce dee%s it apt to resolve the
constitutionalit* of the a%endator* provision.
87 !ection 8: of PD 8A'9, as a%ended b* PD 899=, no) reads0
!ec. 8:. !pecial Condition of /ranchise. U After deductin- five 7(E< percent as /ranchise .ax, the
/ift* 7(>E< percent share of the -overn%ent in the a--re-ate -ross earnin-s of the Corporation fro%
this /ranchise, or '>E if the a--re-ate -ross earnin-s be less than P8(>,>>>,>>>.>> shall
i%%ediatel* be set aside and shall accrue to the 1eneral /und to finance the priorit* infrastructure
develop%ent pro+ects and to finance the restoration of da%a-ed or destro*ed facilities due to
cala%ities, as %a* be directed and authori4ed b* the "ffice of the President of the Philippines.
88 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. =>8.
89 CD/JPDA/ A66"CA."N /R"M 899> -:>8=.
899>QQQQQ P:,=>>,>>>,>>>.>>
8998QQQQQ P :,=>>,>>>,>>>.>>
899:QQQQQ P :,?A>,>>>,>>>.>>
899=QQQQQ P :,9(:,>>>,>>>.>>
899?QQQQQ P :,9;;,>>>,>>>.>>
899(QQQQQ P =,>>:,>>>,>>>.>>
899'QQQQQ P =,>8?,(>>,>>>.>>
899;QQQQQ P :,(A=,?(>,>>>.>>
899AQQQQQ P :,=:?,:(>,>>>.>>
8999QQQQQ P 8,(8;,A>>,>>>.>> 7/ood !ecurit* Pro-ra% /und<
QQQQQ P :,(>>,>>>,>>>.>> 76in-ap Para !a Mahihirap Pro-ra% /und<
QQQQQ P (,?(A,:;;,>>>.>> 7RuralJBrban Develop%ent nfrastructure Pro-ra% /und<
:>>>QQQQQ P =,==>,>>>,>>>.>>
:>>8QQQQQ :>>> 1AA re-enacted
:>>:QQQQQ P (,';;,(>>,>>>.>>
:>>=QQQQQ P A,=:;,>>>,>>>.>>
:>>?QQQQQ :>>= 1AA re-enacted
:>>(QQQQQ P ',8>>,>>>,>>>.>>
:>>'QQQQQ :>>( 1AA re-enacted
:>>;QQQQQ P 88,??(,'?(,>>>.>>
:>>AQQQQQ P ;,A9:,(>>,>>>.>>
:>>9QQQQQ P 9,''(,>:;,>>>.>>
:>8>QQQQQ P 8>,A'8,:88,>>>.>>
:>88QQQQQ P :?,':>,>>>,>>>.>>
:>8:QQQQQ P :?,A9>,>>>,>>>.>>
:>8=QQQQQ P :?,;9>,>>>,>>>.>>
90 #Por& as a tool for political patrona-e, ho)ever, can extend as far as the executive branch. t is no accident,
for instance, that the release of the allocations often coincides )ith the passa-e of a Palace-sponsored bill.
.hat por& funds have -ro)n b* leaps and bounds in the last decade can be traced to presidents in
need of Con-ress support. .he rise in por& )as particularl* notable durin- the Ra%os ad%inistration,
)hen the president and 2ouse !pea&er $ose de Denecia, $r. used -enerous fund releases to convince
con-ress%en to support MalacaGan--initiated le-islation. .he Ra%os era, in fact, beca%e &no)n as
the ,-olden a-e of por&.,
.hrou-h the *ears, thou-h, con-ress%en have also ta&en care to loo& after their ver* o)n. More
often than not, por&-barrel funds are funneled to pro+ects in to)ns and cities )here the la)%a&ers5
o)n relatives have been elected to public officeF thus, por& is a tool for buildin- fa%il* po)er as
)ell. C"A has co%e across %an* instances )here por&-funded pro+ects ended up directl* benefitin-
no less than the la)%a&er or his or her relatives.#7C2BA, PD"NNE .. and CRB_, B""MA, #Por&
is a Political, Not A Develop%ental, .ool.# [http0JJpci+.or-JstoriesJ:>>?Jpor&.ht%lZ Svisited "ctober
::, :>8=W.<
91 3ith reports fro% nCuirer Research and !alaverria, 6eila, #Canda4o, first )histle-blo)er on por& barrel
sca%, diesF '8,# Philippine Dail* nCuirer, Au-ust :>, :>8=, [http0JJne)sinfo. inCuirer.netJ?'9?=9Jcanda4o-
first-)histle-blo)er-on-por&-barrel-sca%-dies-'8Z 7visited "ctober :8, :>8=.<
92 d.
93 d.
94 d.
95 6a)*ers A-ainst Monopol* and Povert* 76AMP< v. !ecretar* of Bud-et and Mana-e%ent, 1.R. No.
8'?9A;, April :?, :>8:, ';> !CRA =;=, =A;.
96 Carva+al, Nanc*, # NB probes P8>-B sca%,# Philippine Dail* nCuirer, $ul* 8:, :>8=
[http0JJne)sinfo.inCuirer.netJ??=:9;Jnbi-probes-p8>-b-sca%Z 7visited "ctober :8, :>8=<.
97 d.
98 !ee NB Executive !u%%ar*. [http0JJ))).-ov.phJ:>8=J>9J8'Jexecutive-su%%ar*-b*-the-nbi-on-the-
pdaf-co%plaints-filed-a-ainst-+anet-li%-napoles-et-alJZ 7visited "ctober ::, :>8=<.
99 Pursuant to "ffice "rder No. :>8>-=>9 dated Ma* 8=, :>8>.
100 Durin- the "ral Ar-u%ents, the CoA Chairperson referred to the D6P as #the source of the so called
2ARD pro+ect, hard portion x x x #under the title the Bud-et of the DP32.# .!N, "ctober A, :>8=, p. '9.
101 .hese i%ple%entin- a-encies included the Depart%ent of A-riculture, DP32 and the Depart%ent of
!ocial 3elfare and Develop%ent 7D!3D<. .he 1"CCs included .echnolo-* and 6ivelihood Resource
Center 7.6RC<J.echnolo-* Resource Center 7.RC<, National 6ivelihood Develop%ent Corporation 7N6DC<,
National A-ribusiness Corporation 7NABC"R<, and the _a%boan-a del Norte A-ricultural Colle-e 7_NAC<
Rubber Estate Corporation 7_REC<. CoA Chairperson,s Me%orandu%. Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. (?'. !ee
also CoA Report, p. 8?.
102 d.
103 d. at (?'-(?;.
104 Carva+al, Nanc*, HMala%pa*a fund lost P9>>M in $6N rac&et , Philippine Dail* nCuirer, $ul* 8', :>8=
[http0JJne)sinfo.inCuirer.netJ??((A(J%ala%pa*a-fund-lost-p9>>%-in-+ln-rac&etZ 7visited "ctober :8, :>8=.<
105 .!N, "ctober A, :>8=, p. 889.
106 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A?9=<, pp. 9 and =?8.
107 .he Court observes that petitioners have not presented sufficient aver%ents on the re%ittances fro% the
Philippine Charit* !)eepsta&es "ffice nor have defined the scope of #the Executive,s 6u%p !u%
Discretionar* /unds# 7!ee rollo S1.R. No. :>A(''W, pp. ?;-?9< )hich appears to be too broad and all-
enco%passin-. Also, )hile Dille-as filed a !upple%ental Petition dated "ctober 8, :>8= 7!upple%ental
Petition, see rollo S1.R. No. :>A(''W, pp. :8=-::>, and pp. ?':-?'?< particularl* presentin- their ar-u%ents
on the Disburse%ent Acceleration Pro-ra%, the sa%e is the %ain sub+ect of 1.R. Nos. :>98=(, :>98=',
:>98((, :>98'?, :>9:'>, :>9:A;, :>9??:, :>9(8;, and :>9('9 and thus, %ust be properl* resolved therein.
2ence, for these reasons, insofar as the Presidential Por& Barrel is concerned, the Court is constrained not to
delve on an* issue related to the above-%entioned funds and conseCuentl* confine its discussion onl* )ith
respect to the issues pertainin- to the Mala%pa*a /unds and the Presidential !ocial /und.
108 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, pp. ?A-?9.
109 d. at ?A.
110 .o note, Dille-as, !upple%ental Petition )as filed on "ctober :, :>8=.
111 Rollo, 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. =?:F and rollo 71.R. No. :>9:(8<, pp. '-;.
112 Re-doc&eted as 1.R. No. :>9:(8 upon Nepo%uceno,s pa*%ent of doc&et fees on "ctober 8', :>8= as
reflected on the "fficial Receipt No. >>;9=?>. Rollo 71.R. No. :>9:(8< p. ?>9.
113 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''< p. 9;.
114 1.R. Nos. 88=8>(, 88=8;?, 88=;'' ] 88=AAA, Au-ust 89, 899?, :=( !CRA (>'.
115 !upra note 9(.
116 Entitled #CREA.N1 AN ENER1P DEDE6"PMEN. B"ARD, DE/NN1 .! P"3ER! AND
/BNC."N!, PR"DDN1 /BND!, .2ERE/"R, AND /"R ".2ER PBRP"!E!.#
117 $o*a v. Presidential Co%%ission on 1ood 1overn%ent, 1.R. No. 9'(?8, Au-ust :?, 899=, ::( !CRA ('A,
(;(.
118 Birao-o v. Philippine .ruth Co%%ission of :>8>, 1.R. No. 89:9=(, Dece%ber ;, :>8>, '=; !CRA ;A,
8?A.
119 $o*a v. Presidential Co%%ission on 1ood 1overn%ent, supra note 88;, at (;(.
120 !outhern 2e%isphere En-a-e%ent Net)or&, nc. v. Anti-.erroris% Council, 1.R. Nos. 8;A((:, 8;A((?,
8;A(A8, 8;AA9>, 8;98(;, and 8;9?'8, "ctober (, :>8>, '=: !CRA 8?', 8;(.
121 Province of North Cotabato v. 1overn%ent of the Republic of the Philippines Peace Panel on Ancestral
Do%ain 71RP<, 1.R. Nos. 8A=(98, 8A=;(:, 8A=A9=, 8A=9(8, and 8A=9':, "ctober 8?, :>>A, ('A !CRA ?>:,
?(>.
122 d. at ?(>-?(8.
123 /rancisco, $r. v. .oll Re-ulator* Board, 1.R. No. 8''98>, 8'998;, 8;='=>, and 8A=(99, "ctober 89, :>8>,
'== !CRA ?;>, ?9=, citin- Province of North Cotabato v. 1overn%ent of the Republic of the Philippines
Peace Panel on Ancestral Do%ain 71RP<, 1.R. Nos. 8A=(98, 8A=;(:, 8A=A9=, 8A=9(8, and 8A=9':, "ctober
8?, :>>A, ('A !CRA ?>:, ?>(.
124 d. at ?9:, citin- Mus&rat v. B.!., :89 B.!. =?' 7898=<.
125 Baldo, $r. v. Co%%ision on Elections, 1.R. No. 8;'8=(, $une 8', :>>9, (A9 !CRA =>', =8>.
126 .!N, "ctober 8>, :>8=, pp. ;9-A8.
127 !ection 8;, Article D of the 89A; Constitution reads0 !ec. 8;. .he President shall have control of all the
executive depart%ents, bureaus, and offices. 2e shall ensure that the la)s be faithfull* executed.
128 !ec. =A. !uspension of Expenditure of Appropriations. @ Except as other)ise provided in the 1eneral
Appropriations Act and )henever in his +ud-%ent the public interest so reCuires, the President, upon notice to
the head of office concerned, is authori4ed to suspend or other)ise stop further expenditure of funds allotted
for an* a-enc*, or an* other expenditure authori4ed in the 1eneral Appropriations Act, except for personal
services appropriations used for per%anent officials and e%plo*ees.
129 Mattel, nc. v. /rancisco, 1.R. No. 8''AA', $ul* =>, :>>A, ('> !CRA (>?, (8?, citin- Constantino v.
!andi-anba*an 7/irst Division<, 1.R. Nos. 8?>'(' and 8(??A:, !epte%ber 8=, :>>;, (== !CRA :>(, :89-
::>.
130 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. :9:.
131 1.R. No. 89A?(;, Au-ust 8=, :>8=.
132 .!N, "ctober 8>, :>8=, p. 8=?.
133 !ection ::, Article D of the 89A; Constitution provides0
!ec. ::. .he President shall sub%it to the Con-ress )ithin thirt* da*s fro% the openin- of ever*
re-ular session, as the basis of the -eneral appropriations bill, a bud-et of expenditures and sources
of financin-, includin- receipts fro% existin- and proposed revenue %easures.
134 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. :9?.
135 d. at (.
136 1.R. No. 8(9>A(, /ebruar* =, :>>?, ?:8 !CRA '('.
137 d. at ''(.
138 !ee /rancisco, $r. v. .oll Re-ulator* Board, supra note 8:=, at ?9:.
139 ='9 B! 8A' A:, !. Ct. '98, 6. Ed. :d. ''= S89':W.
140 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, pp. :9(-:9'.
141 .aGada v. Cuenco, 8>> Phil. 88>8 789(;< unreported case.
142 ?>' Phil. 8 7:>>8<.
143 d. at ?:-?=.
144 An-ara v. Electoral Co%%ission, '= Phil. 8=9, 8(A 789='<.
145 6a Bu-al- BNlaan .ribal Association, nc. v. !ec. Ra%os, ?'( Phil. A'>, A9> 7:>>?<.
146 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. =?9.
147 Public nterest Center, nc. v. 2onorable Dicente L. Roxas, in his capacit* as Presidin- $ud-e, R.C of
Lue4on Cit*, Branch ::;, 1.R. No. 8:((>9, $anuar* =8, :>>;, (8= !CRA ?(;, ?;>.
148 !ocial $ustice !ociet* 7!$!< v. Dan-erous Dru-s Board, 1.R. No. 8(;A;>, Nove%ber =, :>>A, (;> !CRA
?8>, ?:8.
149 .!N, "ctober A, :>8=, pp. 8A?-8A(.
150 People v. Dera, '( Phil. (', A9 789=;<.
151 !ee 6anu4a v. CA, 1.R. No. 8=8=9?, March :A, :>>(, ?(? !CRA (?, '8-':.
152 AR.. A. $udicial decisions appl*in- or interpretin- the la)s or the Constitution shall for% a part of the
le-al s*ste% of the Philippines.
153 Chinese Poun- MenNs Christian Association o f the Philippine slands v. Re%in-ton !teel Corporation,
1.R. No. 8(9?::, March :A, :>>A, ((> !CRA 8A>, 89;-89A.
154 Philconsa v. EnriCue4, supra note 88?, at (::.
155 1.R. No. 8'';8(, Au-ust 8?, :>>A, (': !CRA :(8.
156 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. =:(.
157 d.
158 d. at =:9.
159 d. at ==9.
160 d. at ==A.
161 !ee note 8>;.
162 An-ara v. Electoral Co%%ission, supra note 8??, at 8=9.
163 d. at 8(;.
164 !ection 8, Article D, 89A; Constitution.
165 !ection 8, Article D, 89A; Constitution.
166 !ection 8, Article D, 89A; Constitution.
167 An-ara v. Electoral Co%%ission, supra note 8??, at 8('.
168 1overn%ent of the Philippine slands v. !prin-er, :;; B.!. 8A9, :>= 789:A<.
169 Re0 C"A "pinion on the Co%putation of the Appraised Dalue of the Properties Purchased b* the Retired
ChiefJAssociate $ustices of the !upre%e Court, A.M. No. 88-;-8>-!C, $ul* =8, :>8:, ';A !CRA 8, 9-8>,
citin- Carl Baar, !eparate But !ubservient0 Court Bud-etin- n .he A%erican !tates 8?9-(: 789;(<, cited in
$effre* $ac&son, $udicial ndependence, AdeCuate Court /undin-, and nherent $udicial Po)ers, (: Md. 6.
Rev. :8; 7899=<.
170 d. at 8>, citin- $effre* $ac&son, $udicial ndependence, AdeCuate Court /undin-, and nherent $udicial
Po)ers, (: Md. 6. Rev. :8; 7899=<.
171 !ee Nixon v. Ad%inistrator of 1eneral !ervices, ?== B.!. ?:(, ??8-??' and ?(8-?(: 789;;< and Bnited
!tates v. Nixon, ?8A B.!. 'A= 789;?<, cited in $ustice Po)ell,s concurrin- opinion in %%i-ration and
Naturali4ation !ervice v. Chadha, ?': B.!. 989 789A=<.
172 !ee Poun-sto)n !heet ] .ube Co. v. !a)*er =?= B.!. (;9, (A; 789(:<, !prin-er v. Philippine slands,
:;; B.!. 8A9, :>= 789:A< cited in $ustice Po)ellNs concurrin- opinion in %%i-ration and Naturali4ation
!ervice v. Chadha, ?': B.!. 989 789A=<.
173 :;= Phil. ??= 78998<.
174 d. at ?'8. #=. Bud-et Execution. .as&ed on the Executive, the third phase of the bud-et process covers the
various operational aspects of bud-etin-. .he establish%ent of obli-ation authorit* ceilin-s, the evaluation of
)or& and financial plans for individual activities, the continuin- revie) of -overn%ent fiscal position, the
re-ulation of funds releases, the i%ple%entation of cash pa*%ent schedules, and other related activities
co%prise this phase of the bud-et c*cle.#
175 Birao-o v. Philippine .ruth Co%%ission of :>8>, supra note 88A, at 8(A.
176 1uin-ona, $r. v. Cara-ue, supra note 8;=, at ?'>-?'8.
177 Aba&ada 1uro Part* 6ist v. Purisi%a, supra note 8((, at :9?-:9'.
178 d. at :A;.
179 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. 8;9.
180 d. at :9.
181 d. at :?.
182 d. at A'.
183 d. at =>A.
184 d.
185 !ee CD/ Articles for the *ears 8998, 899:, 899=, 899?, 899(, 899', 899;, and 899A.
186 !ee PDA/ Article for the *ear :>>> )hich )as re-enacted in :>>8. !ee also the follo)in- 8999 CAs0
#/ood !ecurit* Pro-ra% /und,# the # 6in-ap Para !a Mahihirap Pro-ra% /und,# and the #RuralJBrban
Develop%ent nfrastructure Pro-ra% /und.# !ee further the 899; DepEd !chool Buildin- /und.
187 !ee PDA/ Article for the *ears :>>(, :>>', :>>;, :>>A, :>>9, :>8>, :>88, and :>8=.
188 Also, in !ection :.8 of DBM Circular No. (?; dated $anuar* 8A, :>8= 7DBM Circular (?;-8=<, or the
#1uidelines on the Release of /unds Char-eable A-ainst the Priorit* Develop%ent Assistance /und for /P
:>8=,# it is explicitl* stated that the #PDA/ shall be used to fund priorit* pro-ra%s and pro+ects identified b*
the 6e-islators fro% the Pro+ect Menu.# 7E%phasis supplied<
189 .o note, !pecial Provision ? cannot @ as respondents sub%it @ refer to reali-n%ent of pro+ects since the
sa%e provision sub+ects the reali-n%ent to the condition that the #allot%ent released has not *et been
obli-ated for the ori-inal pro+ectJscope of )or&#. .he fore-oin- proviso should be read as a textual reference
to the savin-s reCuire%ent stated under !ection :(7(<, Article D of the 89A; Constitution )hich pertinentl*
provides that #x x x the President, the President of the !enate, the !pea&er of the 2ouse of Representatives,
the Chief $ustice of the !upre%e Court, and the heads of Constitutional Co%%issions %a*, b* la), be
authori4ed to au-%ent an* ite% in the -eneral appropriations la) for their respective offices fro% savin-s in
other ite%s of their respective appropriations. n addition, !ections ?.:.=, ?.:.? and ?.=.= of DBM Circular
(?;-8=, the i%ple%entin- rules of the :>8= PDA/ Article, respectivel* reCuire that0 7a< #the allot%ent is still
valid or has not *et lapsed#F 7b< #reCuests for reali-n%ent of unobli-ated allot%ent as of Dece%ber =8, :>8:
treated as continuin- appropriations in /P :>8= shall be sub%itted to the DBM not later than $une =>, :>8=#F
and 7c< reCuests for reali-n%ent shall be supported )ith, a%on- others, a #certification of availabilit* of
funds.# As the letter of the la) and the -uidelines related thereto evo&e the le-al concept of savin-s, !pecial
Provision ? %ust be construed to be a provision on reali-n%ent of PDA/ funds, )hich )ould necessaril* but
onl* incidentall* include the pro+ects for )hich the funds have been allotted to. .o construe it other)ise
)ould effectivel* allo) PDA/ funds to be reali-ned outside the a%bit of the fore-oin- provision, thereb*
sanctionin- a constitutional aberration.
190 Aside fro% the sharin- of the executive,s reali-n%ent authorit* )ith le-islators in violation of the
separation of po)ers principle, it %ust be pointed out that !pecial Provision ?, insofar as it confers fund
reali-n%ent authorit* to depart%ent secretaries, is alread* unconstitutional b* itself. As recentl* held in
Na4areth v. Dillar 7Na4areth<, 1.R. No. 8AA'=(, $anuar* :9, :>8=, 'A9 !CRA =A(, ?>=-?>?, !ection :(7(<,
Article D of the 89A; Constitution, li%itin- the authorit* to au-%ent, is #strictl* but reasonabl* construed as
exclusive# in favor of the hi-h officials na%ed therein. As such, the authorit* to reali-n funds allocated to the
i%ple%entin- a-encies is exclusivel* vested in the President, vi4.0
t bears e%phasi4in- that the exception in favor of the hi-h officials na%ed in !ection :(7(<, Article
D of the Constitution li%itin- the authorit* to transfer savin-s onl* to au-%ent another ite% in the
1AA is strictl* but reasonabl* construed as exclusive. As the Court has expounded in 6o&in, $r. v.
Co%%ission on Elections0
3hen the statute itself enu%erates the exceptions to the application of the -eneral rule, the
exceptions are strictl* but reasonabl* construed. .he exceptions extend onl* as far as their lan-ua-e
fairl* )arrants, and all doubts should be resolved in favor of the -eneral provision rather than the
exceptions. 3here the -eneral rule is established b* a statute )ith exceptions, none but the enactin-
authorit* can curtail the for%er. Not even the courts %a* add to the latter b* i%plication, and it is a
rule that an express exception excludes all others, althou-h it is al)a*s proper in deter%inin- the
applicabilit* of the rule to inCuire )hether, in a particular case, it accords )ith reason and +ustice.
.he appropriate and natural office of the exception is to exe%pt so%ethin- fro% the scope of the
-eneral )ords of a statute, )hich is other)ise )ithin the scope and %eanin- of such -eneral )ords.
ConseCuentl*, the existence of an exception in a statute clarifies the intent that the statute shall appl*
to all cases not excepted. Exceptions are sub+ect to the rule of strict constructionF hence, an* doubt
)ill be resolved in favor of the -eneral provision and a-ainst the exception. ndeed, the liberal
construction of a statute )ill see% to reCuire in %an* circu%stances that the exception, b* )hich the
operation of the statute is li%ited or abrid-ed, should receive a restricted construction. 7E%phases
and underscorin- supplied<
.he co-ence of the Na4areth dictu% is not enfeebled b* an invocation of the doctrine of Cualified
political a-enc* 7other)ise &no)n as the #alter e-o doctrine#< for the bare reason that the sa%e is not
applicable )hen the Constitution itself reCuires the President hi%self to act on a particular %atter,
such as that instructed under !ection :(7(<, Article D of the Constitution. As held in the land%ar&
case of Dillena v. !ecretar* of nterior 7'; Phil. ?(8 S89A;W<, constitutional i%pri%atur is precisel*
one of the exceptions to the application of the alter e-o doctrine, vi4.0
After serious reflection, )e have decided to sustain the contention of the -overn%ent in this case on
the board proposition, albeit not su--ested, that under the presidential t*pe of -overn%ent )hich )e
have adopted and considerin- the depart%ental or-ani4ation established and continued in force b*
para-raph 8, section 8:, Article D, of our Constitution, all executive and ad%inistrative
or-ani4ations are ad+uncts of the Executive Depart%ent, the heads of the various executive
depart%ents are assistants and a-ents of the Chief Executive, and except in cases )here the Chief
Executive is reCuired b* the Constitution or the la) to act in person or the exi-encies of the situation
de%and that he act personall*, the %ultifarious executive and ad%inistrative functions of the Chief
Executive are perfor%ed b* and throu-h the executive depart%ents, and the acts of the secretaries of
such depart%ents, perfor%ed and pro%ul-ated in the re-ular course of business, are, unless
disapproved or reprobated b* the Chief Executive, presu%ptivel* the acts of the Chief Executive.
7E%phases and underscorin- suppliedF citations o%itted<
191 Aba&ada 1uro Part* 6ist v. Purisi%a, supra note 8((, at :9?-:9'.
192 .!N, "ctober 8>, :>8=, pp. 8', 8;, 8A, and :=.
193 .!N, "ctober 8>, :>8=, pp. ;:-;=.
194 Aside fro% its conceptual ori-ins related to the separation of po)ers principle, Cor)in, in his co%%entar*
on Constitution of the Bnited !tates %ade the follo)in- observations0
At least three distinct ideas have contributed to the develop%ent of the principle that le-islative
po)er cannot be dele-ated. "ne is the doctrine of separation of po)ers0 3h* -o to the trouble of
separatin- the three po)ers of -overn%ent if the* can strai-ht)a* re%er-e on their o)n %otionO .he
second is the concept of due process of la), )hich precludes the transfer of re-ulator* functions to
private persons. 6astl*, there is the %axi% of a-enc* #Dele-ata potestas non potest dele-ari,# )hich
$ohn 6oc&e borro)ed and for%ulated as a do-%a of political science . . . Chief $ustice .aft offered
the follo)in- explanation of the ori-in and li%itations of this idea as a postulate of constitutional
la)0 #.he )ell-&no)n %axi% ,dele-ata potestas non potest delefari,, applicable to the la) of a-enc*
in the -eneral co%%on la), is )ell understood and has had )ider application in the construction of
our /ederal and !tate Constitutions than it has in private la) . . . .he /ederal and !tate Constitutions
than it has in private la) . . . .he /ederal Constitution and !tate Constitutions of this countr* divide
the -overn%ental po)er into three branches . . . n carr*in- out that constitutional division . . . it is a
breach of the National funda%ental la) if Con-ress -ives up its le-islative po)er and transfers it to
the President, or to the $udicial branch, or if b* la) it atte%pts to invest itself or its %e%bers )ith
either executive po)er of +udicial po)er. .his is not to sa* that the three branches are not co-ordinate
parts of one -overn%ent and that each in the field of its duties %a* not invo&e -overn%ent and that
each in the field of its duties %a* not invo&e the action of the t)o other branches in so far as the
action invo&ed shall not be an assu%ption of the constitutional field of action of another branch. n
deter%inin- )hat it %a* do in see&in- assistance fro% another branch, the extent and character of
that assistance %ust be fixed accordin- to co%%on sense and the inherent necessities of the
-overn%ental coordination. 7E%phases supplied<
195 !ection 8, Article D, 89A; Constitution.
196 !ee Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, =9 Phil. ''>, ;>: 78989<.
197 !ee !ection :=7:<, Article D of the 89A; Constitution.
198 !ee !ection :A7:<, Article D of the 89A; Constitution.
199 Aba&ada 1uro Part* 6ist v. Purisi%a, supra note 8((, at :AA.
200 8'9 Phil. ?=;, ??;-??A 789;;<.
201 Philippine Constitution Association v. EnriCue4, supra note 88?, at (::.
202 Ben-4on v. !ecretar* of $ustice and nsular Auditor, ': Phil. 98:, 98' 789='<.
203 An-ara v. Electoral Co%%ission, supra note 8??, at 8('.
204 Aba&ada 1uro Part* 6ist v. Purisi%a, supra note 8((, at :A;.
205 d. at :9:.
206 Ben-4on v. !ecretar* of $ustice and nsular Auditor, supra note :>:, at 98'-98;.
207 #6o--rollin- le-islation refers to the process in )hich several provisions supported b* an individual
le-islator or %inorit* of le-islators are co%bined into a sin-le piece of le-islation supported b* a %a+orit* of
le-islators on a Cuid pro Cuo basis0 no one provision %a* co%%and %a+orit* support, but the total pac&a-e
)ill.I !ee Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. ?:>, citin- Briffault, Richard, H.he te% Deto in !tate Courts, ''
.e%p. 6. Rev. 88;8, 88;; 7899=<.
208 Passarello, Nicholas, #.he te% Deto and the .hreat of Appropriations Bundlin- in Alas&a,# => Alas&a
6a) Revie) 8:A 7:>8=<, citin- Blac&,s 6a) Dictionar* 8;>> 79th ed. :>>9<.
[http0JJscholarship.la).du&e.eduJalrJvol=>Jiss8J(Z 7visited "ctober :=, :>8=<.
209 %%i-ration and Naturali4ation !ervice v. Chadha, ?': B.!. 989 789A=<.
210 :99 B.!. ?8> 789=;<.
211 .o note, in 1on4ales v. Macarai-, $r. 71.R. No. A;'=', Nove%ber 89, 899>, 898 !CRA ?(:, ?'(<, citin-
Co%%on)ealth v. Dodson 788 !.E., :d 8:>, 8;' Da. :A8<, the Court defined an ite% of appropriation as #an
indivisible su% of %one* dedicated to a stated purpose.# n this relation, $ustice Carpio astutel* explained
that an #ite%# is indivisible because the a%ount cannot be divided for an* purpose other than the specific
purpose stated in the ite%.
212 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. ?:8.
213 d.
214 d. at =8'.
215 d. at ?:8.
216 d. at (''.
217 d. at (';.
218 #t cannot be denied that %ost -overn%ent actions are inspired )ith noble intentions, all -eared to)ards
the better%ent of the nation and its people. But then a-ain, it is i%portant to re%e%ber this ethical principle0
,.he end does not +ustif* the %eans., No %atter ho) noble and )orth* of ad%iration the purpose of an act,
but if the %eans to be e%plo*ed in acco%plishin- it is si%pl* irreconcilable )ith constitutional para%eters,
then it cannot still be allo)ed. .he Court cannot +ust turn a blind e*e and si%pl* let it pass. t )ill continue to
uphold the Constitution and its enshrined principles. ,.he Constitution %ust ever re%ain supre%e. All %ust
bo) to the %andate of this la). Expedienc* %ust not be allo)ed to sap its stren-th nor -reed for po)er
debase its rectitude.,# 7Birao-o v. Philippine .ruth Co%%ission of :>8>, supra note 88A, 8;;F citations
o%itted<
219 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. ?>'.
220 d. at ?>;.
221 Bernas, $oaCuin 1., !.$., .he 89A; Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines0 A Co%%entar*, :>>=
Edition, p. 88>A.
222 Aba&ada 1uro Part* 6ist v. Purisi%a, supra note 8((.
223 !ee !ection ::, Article D, 89A; Constitution.
224 !ee !ection :8, Article D, 89A; Constitution.
225 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A?9=<, p. 9.
226 !ee Pa%aton- v. Co%%ission on Elections, 1.R. No. 8'8A;:, April 8=, :>>?, ?:; !CRA 9', 8>>-8>8.
227 Entitled #AN AC. PR"DDN1 /"R A 6"CA6 1"DERNMEN. C"DE "/ 8998.#
228 :=> Phil. =;9, =A;-=AA 789A'<.
229 d.
230 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, pp. 9(-9'.
231 Philconsa v. EnriCue4, supra note 88?, at (:=.
232 No-rales, Prospero C. and 6a-%an, Edcel C., 2ouse of Representatives of the Philippines,
#Bnderstandin- the ,Por& Barrel,,# [http0JJ))).con-ress.-ov.phJdo)nloadJ 8?thJpor&^barrel.pdf Z 7visited
"ctober 8;, :>8=<.
233 [http0JJ))).-ov.phJ:>8=J>AJ:=Jen-lish-state%ent-of-president-aCuino-on-the-abolition-of-pdaf-au-ust-
:=-:>8=JZ 7visited "ctober ::, :>8=<.
234 !ection 8>' of the 61C provides0
!ec. 8>'. 6ocal Develop%ent Councils. @ 7a< Each local -overn%ent unit shall have a co%prehensive
%ulti-sectoral develop%ent plan to be initiated b* its develop%ent council and approved b* its
san--unian. /or this purpose, the develop%ent council at the provincial, cit*, %unicipal, or baran-al
level, shall assist the correspondin- san--unian in settin- the direction of econo%ic and social
develop%ent, and coordinatin- develop%ent efforts )ithin its territorial +urisdiction.
235 !ee !ection 8>9 of the 61C.
236 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. ?:=.
237 d. at ?:;.
238 d. at ?=9-??>.
239 d. at ?=? and ??8.
240 !ee 1uin-ona, $r. v. Cara-ue, supra note 8;=, )here the Court upheld the constitutionalit* of certain
auto%atic appropriation la)s for debt servicin- althou-h said la)s did not readil* indicate the exact a%ounts
to be paid considerin- that #the a%ounts nevertheless are %ade certain b* the le-islative para%eters provided
in the decrees#F hence, #the Executive is not of unli%ited discretion as to the a%ounts to be disbursed for debt
servicin-.# .o note, such la)s var* in -reat de-ree )ith the )a* the :>8= PDA/ Article )or&s considerin-
that0 7a< individual le-islators and not the executive %a&e the deter%inationsF 7b< the choice of both the
a%ount and the pro+ect are to be subseCuentl* %ade after the la) is passed and upon the sole discretion of the
le-islator, unli&e in 1uin-ona, $r. )here the a%ount to be appropriated is dictated b* the contin-enc* external
to the discretion of the disbursin- authorit*F and 7c< in 1uin-ona, $r. there is no effective control of the funds
since as lon- as the contin-enc* arises %one* shall be auto%aticall* appropriated therefor, hence )hat is left
is %erel* la) execution and not le-islative discretion.
241 d. at ?':.
242 := Nev. :( 78A9(<.
243 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. ?=A.
244 d. at =>>.
245 .he pro+ect identifications %ade b* the Executive should al)a*s be in the nature of la) enforce%ent and,
hence, for the sole purpose of enforcin- an existin- appropriation la). n relation thereto, it %a* exercise its
rule-%a&in- authorit* to -reater particulari4e the -uidelines for such identifications )hich, in all cases, should
not -o be*ond )hat the dele-atin- la) provides. Also, in all cases, the Executive,s identification or rule-
%a&in- authorit*, insofar as the field of appropriations is concerned, %a* onl* arise if there is a valid
appropriation la) under the para%eters as above-discussed.
246 Aba&ada 1uro Part* 6ist v. Purisi%a, supra note 8((.
247 !ee Bernas, $oaCuin 1., !.$., .he 89A; Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines0 A Co%%entar*,
:>>9 Edition, pp. 'A'-'A;, citin- Pelae4 v. Auditor 1eneral, 8( !CRA ('9, (;'-(;; 789'(<.
248 d. at :;;.
249 ` ?=A E+usde% 1eneris 7#of the sa%e &ind#<F specific )ordsF A: C.$.!. !tatutes ` ?=A.
250 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. ?=;, citin- ` ?=A E+usde% 1eneris 7#of the sa%e &ind#<F specific )ordsF A:
C.$.!. !tatutes ` ?=A.
251 Based on a $ul* (, :>88 postin- in the -overn%entNs )ebsite [http0JJ))).-ov.phJ:>88J>;J>(Jbud-et-
secretar*-abad-clarifies-nature-of-%ala%pa*a-fundJZF attached as Annex #A# to the Petitioners,
Me%orandu%<, the Mala%pa*a /unds )ere also used for non-ener-* related pro+ects, to )it0
.he rest of the 9A.;= percent or P89.=9 billion )as released for non-ener-* related pro+ects0 8< in
:>>', P8 billion for the Ar%ed /orces Moderni4ation /undF :< in :>>A, P? billion for the Depart%ent
of A-ricultureF =< in :>>9, a total of P8?.=9 billion to various a-encies, includin-0 P;.>; billion for
the Depart%ent of Public 3or&s and 2i-h)a*sF P:.8? billion for the Philippine National
PoliceF P8.A: billion for Sthe Depart%ent of A-ricultureWF P8.? billion for the National 2ousin-
Authorit*F and P9>> %illion for the Depart%ent of A-rarian Refor%.
252 /or acade%ic purposes, the Court expresses its disa-ree%ent )ith petitioners, ar-u%ent that the previous
version of !ection 8: of PD 8A'9 constitutes an undue dele-ation of le-islative po)er since it allo)s the
President to broadl* deter%ine the purpose of the Presidential !ocial /und,s use and perforce %ust be
declared unconstitutional. Luite the contrar*, the 8st para-raph of the said provision clearl* indicates that the
Presidential !ocial /und shall be used to finance specified t*pes of priorit* infrastructure and socio-civic
pro+ects, na%el*, /lood Control, !e)era-e and !e)a-e, Nutritional Control, Population Control, .ulun-an n-
Ba*an Centers, Beautification and Milusan- Mabuha*an at Maunlaran 7MMM< pro+ects located )ithin the
Metropolitan Manila area. 2o)ever, )ith re-ard to the stated -eo-raphical-operational li%itation, the :nd
para-raph of the sa%e provision nevertheless allo)s the Presidential !ocial /und to finance #priorit*
infrastructure and socio-civic pro+ects throu-hout the Philippines as %a* be directed and authori4ed b* the
"ffice of the President of the Philippines.# t %ust, ho)ever, be Cualified that the :nd para-raph should not be
construed to %ean that the "ffice of the President %a* direct and authori4e the use of the Presidential !ocial
/und to an* &ind of infrastructure and socio-civic pro+ect throu-hout the Philippines. Pursuant to the %axi%
of noscitur a sociis , 7%eanin-, that a )ord or phrase,s #correct construction %a* be %ade clear and specific
b* considerin- the co%pan* of )ords in )hich it is founded or )ith )hich it is associated#F see Chave4 v.
$udicial and Bar Council, 1.R. No. :>::?:, $ul* 8;, :>8:, ';' !CRA (;9, (9A-(99< the :nd para-raph
should be construed onl* as an expansion of the -eo-raphical-operational li%itation stated in the 8st
para-raph of the sa%e provision and not a -rant of carte blanche authorit* to the President to veer a)a* fro%
the pro+ect t*pes specified thereunder. n other )ords, )hat the :nd para-raph %erel* allo)s is the use of the
Presidential !ocial /und for /lood Control, !e)era-e and !e)a-e, Nutritional Control, Population Control,
.ulun-an n- Ba*an Centers, Beautification and Milusan- Mabuha*an at Maunlaran 7MMM< pro+ects even
thou-h the sa%e )ould be located outside the Metropolitan Manila area. .o dee% it other)ise )ould be
tanta%ount to undul* expandin- the rule-%a&in- authorit* of the President in violation of the sufficient
standard test and, ulti%atel*, the principle of non-dele-abilit* of le-islative po)er.
253 Blac&,s 6a) Dictionar* 7;th Ed., 8999<, p. ;A?.
254 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, pp. ?A-?9.
255 d.
256 :=? Phil. (:8, (==-(=? 789A;<.
257 :(: Phil. :'? 789A9<.
258 d. at :;9
259 d. at :;A.
260 Rollo 71.R. No. :>A(''<, p. ?'=.
261 d. at ?(9-?':.
262 d. at =>?-=>(.
263 [http0JJ))).db%.-ov.phJ)p-contentJuploadsJBE!EJBE!E:>8=J1lossar*.pdfZ 7visited Nove%ber ?,
:>8=<.
264 Notice of Cash Allocation 7NCA<. Cash authorit* issued b* the DBM to central, re-ional and provincial
offices and operatin- units throu-h the authori4ed -overn%ent servicin- ban&s of the MD!,X to cover the
cash reCuire%ents of the a-encies.
XMD! stands for Modified Disburse%ent !che%e. t is a procedure )hereb* disburse%ents b*
N1 a-encies char-eable a-ainst the account of the .reasurer of the Philippines are effected
throu-h 1!Bs.XX
XX 1!B stands for 1overn%ent !ervicin- Ban&s. 7d.<
265 .!N, "ctober 8>, :>8=, pp. =(-='.
266 Co%%issioner of nternal Revenue v. !an RoCue Po)er Corporation, 1.R. No. 8A;?A(, "ctober A, :>8=,
citin- !errano de A-ba*ani v. Philippine National Ban&, 8?A Phil. ??=, ??;-??A 789;8<.
267 d.
268 d.
.he 6a)phil Pro+ect - Arellano 6a) /oundation