The people have won — for now.
The Supreme Court’s expunging of the congressional pork barrel matched the public outcry for its abolition. In declaring unconstitutional the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), the SC relied on plain definition of the government branches. The Executive executes; the Legislature legislates. That was the very point of rallies, blogs, and other protests against the P27.5-billion personal lump sums of 24 senators and 292 congressmen. Being discretionary, the yearly P200 million per senator and P70 million per congressman were prone to abuse.
Going by state audits, the lawmakers did abuse, by alloting their “pork” to bogus projects and NGOs. In 2007-2009 alone, investigators unraveled, eight lawmakers filched P10 billion “pork,” in conspiracy with “fixer” Janet Lim Napoles. Charged so far with plunder are: Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Bong Revilla. Allegedly they pocketed P173 million, P184 million, and P225 million, respectively. Charged too are: former representatives Rizalina Seachon-Lanete (now governor of Masbate), Edgar Valdez (Apec party), Rodolfo Plaza (Agusan del Sur), Samuel Dangwa (Benguet ), and Constantino Jaraula (Cagayan de Oro).
There are other alleged fixers: Ruby Tuason, Maya Santos, and new congresswoman Nancy Catamco. And there reportedly are more plundering lawmakers: at least 20 past and present senators, and 180 congressmen.
The people valiantly, vigilantly must fight on. The lawmakers will not accept the SC ruling just like that. They overspent tons of money to get elected. They aim to recover the dirty investments by keeping the “pork.” This early they are inserting provisos in the 2014 national budget as permutations of the PDAF. Civil society must monitor Congress debates, particularly the bicameral conferences that will reconcile variances in the Senate and House versions.
Too, the lawmakers slyly are invoking recent calamities to get their hands on yet unspent 2013 “pork.” Supposedly the P14-billion balance of the PDAF can help the nine million victims of Super-Typhoon Haiyan. Not to forget, the hundreds of thousands others displaced by the Bohol earthquake, the Zamboanga City siege, and the Davao floods. They are petitioning the SC to unfreeze the money for relief and rehab.
If the SC relents, its 14-0 rout would be voided. Releasing the P14 billion back to the lawmakers is to renew their discretionary lump sums. If they wish to help calamity victims, then they must pass supplemental budgets. Where the money would go — resettlements, food-for-work, catch-up schools, etc. — should be detailed.
There is also the presidential “pork” to obliterate. Like the PDAF, the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) is a discretionary lump sum. In 2011-2012 it totaled P142 billion, impounded by Malacañang midyear from unspent agency budgets and yearend from savings. The Executive unconstitutionally realigned state funds from congressionally approved programs to erstwhile unknown ones. It took a speech by Estrada, in distracting the public from his alleged PDAF scams, to expose the DAP.
Pending in the SC are ten petitions to scrap the DAP. The oral arguments commenced Tuesday, after the SC justices unanimously scrapped the PDAF. In the coming days the justices will weigh the DAP.
If left to keep lump sums, the President would become mightier than ever. Public spending would be at the option of one man. The claim is baseless that the DAP is vital for an honest President to spur progress. Honesty does not automatically imbue wisdom. Governance requires the collective thinking of elected and appointed leaders. Budgeting involves not only the President, with the Cabinet and local officials under his supervision, but also the Congress and the Judiciary.
Absolute power over state funds absolutely will corrupt an honest President. Consequently deluding himself to be all knowing, he would use discretionary lump sums to buy off Congress and the SC. The tripod of government branches would topple.
Nine percent, or P13 billion, of the P142-billion DAP was given to 19 senators and 11 congressmen to use as they pleased. That is another anomaly. The President may realign agency savings only to other needs of the same agency, never another government branch.
In exposing the DAP, Estrada hinted that the P13 billion was a bribe for Congress to oust Chief Justice Renato Corona for graft. Budget Sec. Florencio Abad denied it. But then, he cannot explain why, of the P13 billion, P97 million went to Enrile, and P50 million each to Estrada and Revilla — the very same lawmakers that Malacañang calls PDAF thieves. That alone underlines how discretion can be irrational.
* * *
Ex-senator Rene Saguisag had better pass all his law students at once, and exempt them from attending any more classes. They need not, as he challenges them, produce any copy of the Commission on Audit’s quarterly reports on the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF). Such details, along with those on the Special Allowances for Judges (SAJ), are on the Supreme Court website: sc.judiciary.gov.ph. The documents have been uploaded since Aug. 2013, as part of the SC’s governance reforms.
Saguisag, his students, and all interested reviewers can click on the folder, “Public Information,” then the subfolder, “Transparency and Accountability.” For easy reference, bookmark the link: http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pio/accountabilityreports/.
Last Monday I referred to Saguisag’s article about “the SC’s silence on the JDF,” impliedly the Judiciary’s version of the “pork.” Past SCs had not publicized the COA audits, as required by law; the present one under Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno is open. The audits will show if the SC rightly is allotting 80 percent of the JDF to cost-of-living allowances of Judiciary employees, and 20 percent to facilities and equipment. My apologies for any misimpression or confusion caused.
* * *
Catch Sapol radio show, Saturdays, 8-10 a.m., DWIZ (882-AM).
No comments:
Post a Comment