Pork barrel and the INC

BEHIND THE SCENES

Alfred P. Dizon

Our perennially tipsy neighborhood philosopher, in yet another of our roadside talks was all praises for Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales and Justice Sec. Leila De Lima.

He said the move of the Office of the Ombudsman to investigate President Aquino, Budget Secretary Florencio Abad and other officials in connection with the controversial Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) was long overdue but a welcome development. 

In the case of De Lima, he said it was good she had the balls for standing up against what he called the “spoiled and immature brat,” (all 12 million of them nationwide) that is the Iglesia ni Kristo, which he said, is now flexing its muscles as next year’s polls near.

According to our philosopher, the INC should have realized that De Lima was only following up a complaint of illegal detentionby an INC minister against its top officials and this was a purely legal or police matter – not a matter of religion. He said the call of the INC rallyists for De Lima to respect the separation of the church and the state following was misplaced.

“Come to think of it, INC members are told by their top officials whom to vote and they do so blindly. Separation of church and state my a…s That is the reason politicians are afraid of them if they go against their wishes. I appreciate more other religious groups like the Roman Catholic Church since they just tell their flock whom to vote according to their conscience,” he said.

                ***

Anyhow, back to Morales who told the House appropriations committee chaired by Davao City Rep. Isidro Ungab that, “There is already a fact-finding report that is currently under evaluation by the ombudsman. If we approve it, preliminary investigation follows. But we want to be sure of the law and the jurisprudence.”

She also said she is evaluating another fact-finding report on a plunder case against Abad which be resolved within this month.Another report she is considering deals with the alleged misuse of P900 million in Malampaya funds. The officials accused in this case include former President now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and former Agrarian Reform secretary Nasser Pangandaman.

But Malacañang said the President is immune from suit. “This is based from constitutional principle that an incumbent President of the Philippines is immune from suit,” Secretary Herminio Coloma Jr. of the Presidential Communications Operations Office said in a statement.

Coloma, however, acknowledged the power of the ombudsman to investigate.

“The Office of the Ombudsman is empowered by law to conduct such investigation as stated by Ombudsman Morales in reply to a question during a hearing on the proposed budget of her office in the House of Representatives,” he said.Abad said, “It’s the process of the ombudsman and we respect it. We will cooperate. We do want to put a closure to this issue.”

                ***

He said the Supreme Court has upheld in the DAP cases the “doctrine of operative fact, meaning that what we did was constitutional, legal and regular, and we implemented the economic stimulus program in good faith.In fact, the Supreme Court declared that DAP benefited the country. We stand by our position that DAP was an urgent and appropriate response to the then under-spending problem that was slowing down the economy. The resulting uptick in spending and growth validated our position,” he said.

“We also commit to align, as we have already done, our savings, augmentation and realignment policies along with SC decision,” he added.

The budget chief noted that “there was no insinuation of graft” in the tribunal’s ruling, adding the ombudsman has not yet sought any comment from them.

“This is just the fact-finding stage. If they go to preliminary investigation, that’s when they will require us to comment,” Abad, who is a lawyer, said.

The Supreme Court stopped the administration’s economic stimulus program in 2014 after declaring at least four practices under it as unconstitutional.

                ***

This, as anti-corruption groups last week called on the Supreme Court to declare unconstitutional certain provisions in the 2015 national budget, including National Budget Circular No. 559 (NBC 559) and some provisions under the Special Purpose Fund.

In a petition filed by anti-corruption groups, led by former national treasurer Leonor Briones, sought to be declared unconstitutional were Sections 70 and 73 of the 2015 General Appropriations Act (GAA)

Section 70 of the 2015 GAA defines savings as portions or balances of any unreleased appropriations in the budget law which have not been obligated. Section 73 specifies rules in realignment of allotment classes and reprioritization of items in the appropriations.

The petitioners asked the SC to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) that would prevent the Executive Department from further implementing the challenged provisions in the 2015 GAA.

“Petitioners call on this Honorable Court to prevent the Legislative and the Executive from making the Constitution or the ruling in the Belgica or Araullo illusory. Whether it is through deceptive or creative schemes, the Executive and the Legislative branches should be prevented from doing indirectly what they cannot legally do directly,” the petition stated.

                ***

The Belgica and Araullo decisions pertain to the declaration of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) and certain practices under the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) as unconstitutional.

The other petitioners in the case are lawyer Ramon Acebedo Pedroza, Frances Irene Rallonza Bretana and Mai Palacio Paner who are members of the Scrap the Pork Network; Rodolfo Aranas Fabricante of the Overseas Filipino Workers Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Inc.; Amorsolo Competente, president of Alert and Concerned Employees for Better SSS; David Diwa, president of National Labor Union; EleuterioTuazon, president of the Philippine Association of Labor Unions; Bienvenid oLorque, member of the Board of Directors of United Filipino Seafarer; Leodegario De Guzman, president of the Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino; Diego Landagan Magpantay of the Citizens Crime Watch-Anti-Corruption Task Force; Alain del Pascua, president of the Katipunan ng mga Anak ng Bayan All Filipino Democratic Movement; Sanlakas through its  president Marie Marguerite Lopez and secretary general Jose Aaron Pedroza Jr.; and the Metro Manila Vendors Alliance-Quezon City represented by its secretary general Flora Santos.

Named respondents were Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa Jr., Budget Secretary Florencio Abad, Senate President Franklin Drilon, and House Speaker Feliciano Belmonte.Former Sen. PanfiloLacson was with the petitioners during the filing of their case before the SC.

                ***

In a statement, Lacson said the provisions challenged in the petition are contrary to the rulings of the SC in PDAF and DAP cases.

On top of Sections 70 and 73 of the 2015 GAA, the petitioners named provisions of the Special Purpose Fund that should be declared unconstitutional. These are the the E-Government Fund (for strategic information and communication technology projects), the International Commitment Fund, the Miscellaneous Personnel Benefit Funds, the National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Fund, the Pension and Gratuity Fund, and the Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Program Fund.

In the case of NBC 559, the petitioners said it should be declared unconstitutional because it was issued in line with Section 73 of the 2015 GAA.

“We are filing the petition before the High Court to take action on the unconstitutionality of the spending for the year 2015 in contraventions of the decisions on the PDAF and the DAP. We believe that the Court should intervene because their decisions have been ignored. Not only that, the Constitution has been ignored and laid aside as well,” Briones, who is now with Social Watch Philippines, said in a statement.

                ***

Thanks to advances in technology like the email and internet, we can be abreast of issues or developments in the blink of an eye. I remember the typewriter which we used to write our stories in the 80s. Ahh, it seems not so long ago.