![]() |
Supreme Court of the Philippines |
The Supreme Court’s
unanimous ruling on the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) as unconstitutional was a most welcome fresh wind amid the two-week calamity
atmosphere in our country.
The SC's decision to permanently
scrap the annual PDAF, amounting to P25.2 billion in next year’s budget, and order prosecution of all those legislators who abused it in past and present regimes, was
just the right boost to a sagging people’s morale.
The nation has been at perhaps its lowest ebb in our history---not only because of the crippling devastation of the super-typhoon and our government’s failure to respond adequately, but also due to the damaged credibility of our leaders on account of the pork barrel scandal that rocked Congress and the Palace over the past four months.
The nation has been at perhaps its lowest ebb in our history---not only because of the crippling devastation of the super-typhoon and our government’s failure to respond adequately, but also due to the damaged credibility of our leaders on account of the pork barrel scandal that rocked Congress and the Palace over the past four months.
Never before has our
standing in the international scene been as challenged as now---thanks to the
PDAF scandals and lousy government response to the super-typhoon crisis.
XXX
Consider, for instance, the
UN directive to assisting US marines not to course any relief delivery to
government officials. Consider too, the remark of the Pinoy editor of a New
Zealand newspaper for Filipino migrant workers who chose to ignore the advice of
our embassy there to course typhoon relief to government bank accounts in
PH, preferring the Red Cross instead. “I’m
not going to mince words,” said Mel Fernandez, “We would like every cent to
reach those poor people rather than get waylaid.”
A Singapore newspaper’s
banner, “Philippine corruption magnifies effects of typhoon,” gave the
universal impression that our government cannot be trusted.
Thus the SC decision came
like a fresh wind boosting our people’s spirits, and promising the twilight of political
patronage and ultimately of the political dynasty system. As an FB entry put it, the birth of a new era of reforms.
XXX
There were many things
remarkable about that 14-0 vote, something that does not come easy in the Court
where each justice is an island unto himself (the last time such a vote was
arrived at was on the Hacienda Luisita
issue in early 2012, which became a direct factor in the impeachment and
conviction of Chief Justice Renato Corona).
For instance, the 14 votes
included those of five justices appointed by President Aquino, led by Chief
Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno. The anti-PDAF decision was penned by another
P-Noy appointee, Justice Estela Perlas-Bernabe, and the majority included Justice
Marvic Leonen who had often sounded like a repeater of the administration on
issues.
XXX
But on the
unconstitutionality of the PDAF all 14 of them were united---and a popular
theory is that the Court was on a mercy mission to save our nation’s reputation,
in the wake of the Napoles scandal that provoked the biggest rally in the
second Aquino reign, and the beating of our respectability in the Yolanda
aftermath.
Had the PDAF not been
scrapped more rallies were being projected, and a move to legislate
its abolition through the constitutionally-mandated People's Initiative, led by former Chief Justice Reynato Puno, would have gained ground.
XXX
As an aside, note that the SC's 15th vote was a prudent abstention from Justice Presbitero Velasco,
whose wife, Lorna Q. Velasco, is an incumbent party-list member of the
House and therefore affected by the PDAF issue.
By the way, it’s not correct,
as reported in the media, that the reason for Justice Velasco’s abstention is
that his son, Lord Allan Velasco, is an incumbent representative, for his opponent
last May, Marinduque Rep. Gina Reyes, was proclaimed rightful winner by the local Comelec Board and then by Speaker Sonny Belmonte. Velasco's protest is now in the jurisdiction of the
House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal.
XXX
That all 14 justices came
together to legally strike down the PDAF---after upholding this issue three times in the past--- and ensure that the multi-billion Malampaya Fund will
be used only for energy promotion purposes, as the law expressly provides, may
have been their collective reaction to the moral and political urgency of our
time.The SC justices were particularly aggrieved at the lump-sum nature of the pork and legislators’ ability to signify recipients (fake NGOs pala ang karamihan!) with zero accounting.
Of course the
legislators are fighting back, while Justice Secretary Leila de Lima intrudes
once again into SC territory by warning the magistrates that curtailing the Disbursement
Accelerating Program (DAP), now pending before the Court, would seriously affecting typhoon rehabilitation effort.
Cavite Rep. Elpidio Barzaga,
a rabid Pro-Noynoy ally, bitterly complained that the SC
decision only saw the ”bad side” of the PDAF, and “not its good effects,” such
as funding scholars and caring for sick people. Frankly this argument about their scholars stinks, for many supposed beneficiaries are fictitious or the kin
of their ward leaders---hardly the poor of society. Besides, as Senior
Justice Antonio Carpio retorted, such funds can be drawn from other legal sources.
XXX
Some solons hit the
justices’ ‘insensitivity’---accusing them of playing to the gallery
and capitalizing on the people’s outrage after the Napoles scams exploded. Doubtless there is this factor, for how can the
justices ignore the poverty gripping the countryside from where the PDAF was
stolen---how the number of those who admitted to self-rated hunger has risen in
recent months.
Now the solons are out to
rescue their unspent PDAF for 2013---all P14.5 billion frozen by the
SC earlier---and channel it (daw!) to areas devastated by Yolanda, through a
“supplemental budget” they plan to rush in time for this year’s budget. The public will, of course, be suspicious of
Congress’ move, especially since DBM Secretary Butch Abad came
out openly looking for ways to skirt the Court’s ruling.
In the public mind, all this could be a mere palusot for the pols to get their hands on those funds again.
In the public mind, all this could be a mere palusot for the pols to get their hands on those funds again.
XXX
But more than any other
factor, what influenced the SC justices to throw out the PDAF and unauthorized
use of the Malampaya Fund was the government’s snail-like response to the calamity
spawned by the worst-ever typhoon---that affected all of us Filipinos.
In a text response
to a query forwarded to me after the SC decision was announced, I opined
that “the SC’s unanimous decision is a repudiation of our rotten political
system which impacted, too, on the government’s inability to respond decisively
to the unprecedented crisis spawned by Yolanda. Instead of investing in, say,
choppers and C-130s crucial to relief operations in calamities, unfortunately
many billions were squandered by our politicians. “
XXX
What was gratifying was that
the justices united on an issue that goes to the heart of the P-Noy
administration. The pork barrel was a weapon the Chief Executive had used to exact votes from members of Congress on crucial issues he had
pushed, such as the RH bill and the impeachment and conviction of Chief Justice
Renato Corona.
Without the PDAF, however---and perhaps soon, with the good chance that the SC would also strike out the DAP, a.k.a. the "presidential pork," President Aquino---so conscious of his popularity rating and political power---would be rendered a lameduck.
Without the PDAF, however---and perhaps soon, with the good chance that the SC would also strike out the DAP, a.k.a. the "presidential pork," President Aquino---so conscious of his popularity rating and political power---would be rendered a lameduck.
XXX
The issue now being argued before the SC is the future of the DAP, amounting to P1.3 trillion (that includes, aside from
Malampaya Fund, the PCSO and Pagcor Funds, a.k.a.the “President’s Social
Fund”), which became the logical target of numerous citizens’ petitions for
abolition after PDAF.
Anti-DAP petitioners argue that if PDAF was ruled as unconstitutional, all the more should the
presidential pork be struck out as it arrogates unto the executive the
prerogative reserved for the legislature to pass the budget. Moreover, it has
been noted that the Constitution allows savings to be realigned only within the
same department. But President Aquino gave P50 million in additional funds from DAP to 19 senators,
after they convicted CJ Corona---clearly a violation as well as a bribe, highly immoral.
There is nagging fear that while the SC dealt the PDAF a blow---it could look the other way with regard to
DAP, as a atonement to Malacanang. A legal luminary opines, however, that should
the SC do this, it would destroy itself.
Citizens’ vigilance has to
continue on this child of the PDAF.
For
comments/reactions, please email:
No comments:
Post a Comment