Lagman: 2024 budget has P449.5-B in 'excess' unprogrammed funds

The P5.768 trillion national budget signed into law by President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. violated the constitution because it included P449.5 billion unprogrammed funds over what was proposed by the Chief Executive, opposition leader Edcel Lagman said Tuesday.

Lagman, the president of the Liberal Party, argued that Congress could not increase the President's initial proposed unprogrammed fund amounting to P281.9 billion, in the same vein that Congress could not exceed the President's proposed new or programmed appropriations as provided under Section 25.1, Article 6 of the Constitution.

"This year’s General Appropriations Act (GAA) which took effect on January 1 suffers a constitutional infirmity insofar as the bicameral conference committee inserted P449.5 billion in excess of the unprogrammed appropriations of P281.9 billion recommended by the President in the national budget or the NEP. The President’s utter failure to veto (delete) the excess items aggravates the constitutional defect," Lagman said.

"Consequently, a constitutional challenge before the Supreme Court is in order to cleanse the GAA of a fatal defect and give guidance to the Congress and the President in the future budget seasons." 

Lagman said that the prohibition on Congress increasing the appropriations recommended by the President covers both the programmed appropriations, which have available budget sources, and the unprogrammed appropriations, which have only contingent budget sources limited to:

• release of new loan proceeds for foreign-assisted projects.
• revenue collections from new tax laws, and
• increase in non-tax revenue collections over target.

"The 2024 NEP recommended a total of P5.768 trillion for programmed appropriations and P289.1 billion for unprogrammed appropriations, the total of both cannot be breached by the Congress. It is well settled that when the Constitution does not distinguish, we must not distinguish," Lagman said.

"Verily, since the Constitution does not distinguish between the programmed appropriations and the unprogrammed appropriations with respect to the congressional ban, the ceiling of both cannot be exceeded by the Congress."

Lagman added that the longstanding interpretation that only the programmed appropriations cannot be increased by Congress had resulted in unprogrammed appropriations being annually increased to accommodate even partisan and pet projects.

"These [pet projects] which are subsequently funded and released during the fiscal year under the suspicious, or even spurious, claim that contingent funding has been realized. What is worse is the scheme of transferring funded projects to the unprogrammed appropriations in order to accommodate pet projects which are then assured of funding," Lagman said.

"The unprogrammed appropriations have become the sanctuary of partisan and pet projects where funding and releases for implementation would even antedate programmed appropriations." 

Albay Rep. Salceda, the chairman of the House Committee said the question of whether or not unprogrammed funds were covered by the constitutional prohibition on increasing appropriations recommended by the President had been discussed in Congress.

"This question was discussed in Congress, and we took the effort, during budget deliberations, to seek guidance from both the Executive through the DBM and the records of the Constitutional Commission," Salceda said.

Salceda said the Department of Budget and Management wrote his office to clarify that  unprogrammed appropriations were not part of the fiscal program.

"As such, only the programmed appropriations are subject to the Article VI, Section 25 (1) of the Constitution, or the prohibition against increasing appropriations recommended by the President," Salceda said.

"In short, the DBM said Congress can increase the unprogrammed appropriations as proposed," he added. — DVM/NB, GMA Integrated News