By Pexcel John Bacon and Erika Mae P. Sinaking, Reporter
THE Supreme Court (SC) ruling on unconstitutional budget provisions may strengthen calls for accountability in public spending, but this, alone, is unlikely to change longstanding practices without stricter scrutiny of budget insertions, political analysts said.
The ruling struck down the portions of the 2024 General Appropriations Act (GAA) involving P449.5 billion worth of increase in unprogrammed appropriations, a P17.99-billion congressional increase to the Public Work department’s Special Road Fund under the 2025 GAA, and special provisions of the 2026 GAA governing the release of standby funds.
Hansley A. Juliano, a political science lecturer at Ateneo de Manila University, said the ruling’s focus on unprogrammed funds and questionable increases to agencies under scrutiny, including the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) and the House of Representatives, could give budget watchdogs greater leverage in demanding accountability.
“While this gives additional leverage to budget watchdogs, explicit naming and shaming of specific lawmakers is needed further to pinpoint accountabilities,” he said in a Facebook Messenger chat.
Mr. Juliano, however, said lawmakers may not change their practices immediately, as budget adjustments and insertions have persisted despite the Supreme Court’s 2013 decisions declaring the Priority Development Assistance Fund and the Disbursement Acceleration Program unconstitutional.
“Lawmakers will not change behavior over time,” he said.
He added that further legal action involving flood control projects and the impeachment proceedings against Vice-President Sara Duterte-Carpio could establish legal and institutional precedents that future administrations could use to deter questionable budget practices.
“The ideal response would be that lawmakers be now bound to properly justify and itemize their budget increases,” Mr. Juliano said.
He also called for an end to the practice of invoking parliamentary courtesy extended to the highest offices of the President and Vice-President to avoid scrutiny, saying lawmakers and the President should be held to the same standards of accountability.
Eric Daniel C. de Torres, political science professor at University of the East, said the ruling has heightened the demand for transparency and accountability, potentially making lawmakers more cautious when proposing budget changes.
More importantly, he said, the budget process should be made accessible to ordinary Filipinos so they can understand how public funds are allocated and monitor changes to appropriations.
Mr. de Torres cautioned, however, that the ruling alone may not lead to lasting reforms given the country’s political system and the lack of progress on electoral reforms.
“The ruling is one thing; pushing for reform is another,” he said in a Facebook Messenger chat, adding that the quality of elected officials remains a crucial consideration in addressing recurring problems in the budget process.
He also questioned whether lawmakers would genuinely scrutinize the proposed 2027 national budget, particularly with the 2028 elections approaching. He also warned against the possibility that public calls for accountability could be met with performative rather than substantive action.
Dennis C. Coronacion, head of Political Science Department at University of Santo Tomas (UST), said the Supreme Court ruling could end secrecy in bicameral conference committee deliberations, where lawmakers reconcile differences between the House and Senate versions of the national budget.
“The Supreme Court’s budget ruling has put an end to the secrecy of the bicameral conference committee,” he said in a Facebook Messenger chat. Historically, he said the committee had made substantial budget changes behind closed doors.
Citing the P449.5-billion unprogrammed appropriations under the 2024 GAA, Mr. Coronacion said the ruling could change how lawmakers negotiate public funds and promote transparency, though it won’t guarantee reforms.
“The Supreme Court ruling provides the legal teeth to radically improve budget transparency, but its success depends entirely on how lawmakers implement it,” he said. “The ruling is a blueprint, not an automated system.”
BUDGET UNCERTAINTIES
Meanwhile, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) said it has yet to determine how much government spending could be affected by the ruling, as it seeks legal guidance on which appropriations can still be implemented.
“We can’t say definitively what is at risk or on hold because we’re clarifying and working with the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) what will be our interpretation of the decision,” Budget Secretary Kim Robert C. de Leon told reporters on the sidelines of a Phinma policy forum over the weekend.
Mr. de Leon said agencies were expected to submit their third-quarter reports within October, which would help establish the amount potentially affected by the ruling. The DBM would continue implementing the national budget but would not release or use funds explicitly covered by the high court ruling, he said.
“We’re not saying that we will stop because we know that we should execute the budget. But we are mindful of what the Supreme Court decision said,” Mr. de Leon said.
He specifically cited the increase in the DPWH’s Special Road Fund under the 2025 General Appropriations Act, which the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional. “So, the very explicit increase is unconstitutional, so that should not be released or used,” he said.
Solicitor General Darlene Marie B. Berberabe earlier said the OSG is seeking to clarify the limits of judicial oversight and executive authority in a motion for reconsideration to be filed with the SC by Nov. 4.
Mr. de Leon said the government was still determining how the ruling would affect other appropriations, adding that the DBM would comply with the court’s decision.
The uncertainty comes as the government tries to accelerate spending in the second half of the year to make up for projects carried over from the 2025 budget.
“Hopefully, that’s what we don’t want to happen because we are in the catch-up period for the second semester,” he said, referring to the possibility that the ruling could further slow spending.
The DBM has not discussed revising its spending outlook, Mr. de Leon said.
2027 BUDGET BILL
For the proposed 2027 national budget, UST’s Mr. Coronacion said that the ruling could strengthen the Senate’s position in scrutinizing the House-approved budget, particularly proposed realignments involving foreign-assisted projects and flood control programs.
He cited Senator Panfilo “Ping” M. Lacson’s support for the ruling, saying it came at a crucial time as the Senate prepares to review the House version of the 2027 budget.
“With this Supreme Court ruling, the Senate is now emboldened to reject or restore hundreds of billions of pesos that the House slashed or realigned from critical lines, such as foreign-assisted projects and flood control programs,” he said.
Mr. Coronacion added that Senate leaders could use the ruling as a legal basis to challenge questionable budget realignments, while House members would face closer scrutiny over changes that could conceal pork barrel allocation.
The ruling comes as lawmakers review the proposed P7.2-trillion national budget for 2027, placing renewed attention on how appropriations are scrutinized and changes are justified during the legislative process.
Budget Secretary Mr. de Leon said the department is hopeful that Congress would pass the proposed 2027 national budget on schedule, warning that a reenacted budget would prevent the government from implementing new projects for the year.
“Legally, the effect of a reenacted budget is we cannot implement any new projects in the 2027. So only those that are recurring can be implemented if there is a reenacted budget,” he said.
The department is working closely with Congress to ensure the timely passage of the proposed budget, he added.
Meanwhile, the Development Budget Coordination Committee will reassess the government’s macroeconomic assumptions, including the effects of the peso’s depreciation and inflation on construction costs.
Mr. de Leon said the overall impact would depend on several indicators, not just foreign exchange movements. The committee typically holds a regular meeting in December to review these assumptions.
previous post
