l{ I 1l't

!lll.l(.

OtT'l'1
I\,f

lli l'[[ltr,lPl'}iNl;]S
IJ

SUPREME COURT
AN

,A

GRECO ANTONIOUS BEI}A B" BELGrC,q" JOSE M. VILLEG--{$ .IR., JOSE L. GONZAI;EZ'

DIEGO,

M. ABANTE and QUINTIN PAITEDES SAN

RBUBEN
Pelitiote4
-- bef.til.i --

G.R. No. For Certiorari and Frohibition rpith Urgent Prayet for the Issuance gf a Temporary . Restraining Qrder and/or Writ of Iniunction

/}n:Hr\r"r 4UGUUI.J

FRANKLIN M. DRILON, in his capacity as Seaate President, THE

AJ\TD BUDGET MANAGEMENT FI-ORENCIO B. ABAp, THE . NATIONAL TREA*SUHCN ROSALIA V. DE LEON, THE SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES, represented by

THE HONORABI.E EXECUTIVE SECRBTARY PAQLTITO N. ocHoA JR., Tr{E SECRETARY

OF
t\t @
*+r

(rf|
t'e1

representd
BELMONTE
Speaker

HOUSE OF RE9S-ESE}-I *#'rilEs

in

by

FELICIANO his capacity a$

'

ofthe Flouse.

Respondents.

tC-*-------

------------,-X

URdENT PETITION FOR CERTIORARI AND PROHIB,ITION lVith Prayer For The fmmediate fssuance of Temporaqy Restraining Order And/Or Writ of Preiiminary Iniunction]
Prtitiorr.r* r.rp..,futf come to this Honorable Supreme Cor:rt and

apirr evils Unmitipted power and tne- iack of accoUntability are Of all the corrupted i.gg7 Coasdftirion, and t:vcry *oo*ry absolutely f!!ori' is sornewhat unique in raechanisrn, .rf g.r**rancc, tl.e subie,ct of-this'Peqiu" Rarrel Systern" that :nerget b:'h evils so tfrl this respect. lior it is orrly ^"f'].ort 'political branch.es ate rrdllingly caught in its searnlessly that ;;; break it' Neitlrer the usconstitutional ernl:r:ace - and neithcr is inclined to of pcsos'hav': been Iixecutive nlr thc] l.c,gislarirrc: {i,Trute thc fact ttrat !,rftf1s peso racked"l I* sqtrantlered. r\ sirtiog *.,',*t,;, r.'"*-*n*a it a "multi-biltion to the ,*.og"irio" of this f,i;, rhcir promise to p{osecute ..h* g*l,y is illlevanf c'ritinue to qu*#;.r,, of whctlr., *,', irrlrctc*tly t,nco,istirutional $ystcm should be tolerated.

that the

on Petitioncrs filc tltis casc against the backdrop of tlrc Conrmission Dcuelopwtttt Audit's $peiial Auclits Cfficc iteport No' 2012-03, cntitlcd Ptioyy PY:'-': (11+) Assistan& Fsnd (PDAI;) uttrl L/aiiut lrfra$rtttures inctuding Laa! Report (referred herein a* tlti'"(,()A Report-)z- Injts 462 pages' the.COA linrits pnrvi,Ics clefilitive tl*ctrrncnt,r.y pr.r.,f, tlr:tf Ctlrtgrtlss lt:rs bt'cachctl tht tf C.* powef glvcn it by thc Constitution on budgetary mnttefs' 1nr{ togethgr with the Execir{ve hrw t""r, "-4g;gstl in acts 9f graye abuse of discretion. In the sarne vein, ,-&.r.*.i po*.i to spencl lies in the hands of the lixecutive in tfr. gnir" of lump-srrm, "Jiiscr*tio"*y frurdsf'or colloquially "special Prxposg F.*ils,' f.SpFs')-.,vhich, has steatlily risen in the past three yeal$ *td lt base{ on the National Expcn iiturc Progratn for 2014 now pegged in the-hunfr{s o{ billions. Thken inai.tiai,atiy or togeAta these frrnds f*I* the '?ork Barrel and Systern", which pctirioncnassail oi the basis that it is: 11) unconstitutional; (i) a continoing act erf grave abuse of discretian. lLbaada vs' Angaq 272 scRA 18 (1ee7)l

Due to thc COA Report and the latest scanclal concerning the Pcrk Barrel System, thc l)rcsirlcnt through an ofEcial state$rent released on'?3 Augusr inif ostensibly tlcclarecl thai "it is time to abolish PDAF". 1'he actual t # of his. proclamatinn howevet, indicates othervise.'Indeed, "PDAIP' as a label wi1l bricrapped brit, the unconstitutional sy$tq it embodies urill remain only to lesurface witir a nl'w nafne presur_nably once the outcry has gone down'
Ttris is ftgther confirmed by the respondent Brrdget Secretary's ov/n statefnent that the ar,nouiii-;lilccltrj fix-ih'g?ork Bartel'systern's legislative cornponent

Inquirer, 22 Aug'ust 2013' Another Senator Seeks Scrappirrg of ?ork Barel', Maila Agcr' Philippioe Daily

The

Available at

http;tr /coa-gov.ph /G \YS]) :\ / 2( I t z /Sa !l.4teqqj'f20 z-O't PDaFf 9!' ,t^t A al-f,Ugrst 2013 is ar"ai-lable ',rt the officul gozttnrnent site The full rexr of th"
t

voluminous CJ)A' Repon

rii:tlgrrel http://-nesurrla;gd,ter."et/47tS95/"tr is accessible frotn the CCA rilebsit

.

at

S;[i.,,,

*t

Ugp,/ er"w,gpr'.pb/2g13/!gr?-l/cnglish-s,tqrfarent-of-prpsrdpnt-'aquino-o$-the-al:qlidorr

gf-Pdaf-august

ffiffi;'.,itt,,.Statcnrcnidated23August2013isattached.ui'rrnexe3A''.

will remaio ifl thc

Pork Barel 20 !.1 l:Utlget.{ T'he J-i*.tc,rti'oe cornponelt "-f the touched and in fact, l-rased on the System, thougft largcli, ,,*.,,iiecf is not tr> bc the highcst cxpcnditure in 2A74 National ti*1r",l.tit,rre Program rvill rcach
history.
,I

outcry T.he sce'ari. is clcspairingiy famiiiar. In 1996, a'sirr.r-lar puhlic $cflrn wzs occurred when rhr: (..o,,,]t,:yrviJe l)eveloprnent. Fund f'CDF') pr'mit-- t-" the one exposed with billi.'s .f pcsos lost and waited. A similar will be made today was g-ivcn -- itr" "Cl)l:l will bc scrapped" and 'TxroPh"l.t afrcr, wc afe back to thc sarne situation' tt has FinrggeC',3*rr*r,r""t", (17) vcars a pernicio.rr'.y.1*. And in between the decades spanning cach new il..f*" ..version" olr "iteration'i of the pork barrcl system, billions of taxpayers tnoney only *i lori ," "orr,rption. 'f'he PresidenCs statement to "abo.lish" 0o trtrth, wfrat happened revise) the PDAF is simply the statt of another cycle,Just like a in the aftermath of rht' Crif scandal, the same dog will iurt resurfacriweuing

different collar.

The fear is neithcr hypothetical nor unfounded. It is engendercd by no "[t]here less than the official srrrcrncnt of the Prcsident himself insisting that, wrong" with the '?ork Barrel Systern'" -With this is nothing categoricJ staternenl in mind, petitigners dgbmit that only the- I-lo.norable Cor:it has iurisclictiorl over the fundamental question of- "intri'rsic ."*dhr[ooality" 9f 'the i'l)ork Barrel System", as well as the moral suasion to fitt lly put it to rest. eontfary to the position laken blr the Pldt4 branches, petitio-n.efs-iespectfully r:ubmit that the "Pork Barrel System" is :epugnant to
several ionstitutional
p

ror''isions.

because by its very nahue, it violates h=y principle of.sepamtion cf Powelyeongress wields the pourer o{ appr,opriation aonly ins.lf"r as-i;uttlirulg ;.i-pr,rlosing where public firnds should be qpent Indeed, the power to: "specify the proiect or activitf' has been held by this to be a.s "detailed and as broad" as Congress watrts it to beHonorable however, who lphilcansa us. Endquez, 235 SCRA 506]. It is the Executive implement.the budget on:r- Congress acqally vdelds the power

First,it is unconstinrdonal

io*t

passes Lteaches

barrcl systan" - whatever narne or fcrm it takes this *uil. The flOA Report shows that despite tn'o {2) cbcades of flout i:l"gg"S loopholcs :urcl Lrsing "safeguards", legislators continuc toIt has ."tirtit"tio""t-limits an<J are directly engaged in proiect implernentation. come to such extrcryre lsl,els that according to the COA Repcrq the lawmalers' ability to hi-iack Executive agency discretion erteids to the release of firads to their preferrecl entities (i.". NGOs) on the Strengfh of x simple
"recommentiation" or letter.

it tfre tt&;k

1o

lpgd-ond

Second, the "Pork ilarrei System" is unconstirutional because it renders bath the Executir.e ancl Legislative branches practically incapable of checking

.,palace: p25B Pork Stays in 201 .l l}uclget", Michael Lim Uu-ac, Philippine Daily loquirer. 25 August 2013.

of each other ou budgct..rry iurd othet mattcrs, thereby wrcckirrg thc systcrn Checks and Baian""*. 'f'f-r" r>rhcr half of the "Pork Barrel Sy_steA" is er,nboclied by the trnbridlctl l,lxt.cufivr. discrction to s1:cnel hundrctls of billittns unrlcr thc .rar-ious lump $*m, rliscretionary funcls, sot'lte of which (i"e. Malampaytr Funds) afe not .u.n inclr,rclccl irr &c budgcr ('off-budget') and thus' beyond Congressionai porvgs ro monitor.. Any congressional interest to check these fljnds for abuse.s is tcmi)c{cd by the thrcnf of losing acce$$ to Pl}Al'l As such, the Executive rnaintairrs PI)AF in whatever forrn so as to keep the Legislative frorn checking horv cxccutive pork is spent. And the cycle continues. This uneasy aliiance bcrwcr:n thc political branches might be politically_ expedient bu!, it is certainly not constitutional undcr a syslgrn crf checks ancl balances

Thir4 the "Po"k lJarrel System" is r.rrcoas:dtutional bccaule it is repugnant to the provisions of the Accounability provision: of the
Co"stitution. Again, tlic CC)A Ilepot shows that the "Pork Barrel System" is irnperViou.". to any atfeffpt to make it comply with constitutional provisioas oa accorurtlrbility. For instancr:, most of the.seven fr) "new safeguards'l mentioned in the President's Staterncnt dated 23 August.2073 are alread)t in-c{isteace sorne since 7996. Whar tlrc CC)A Report definiwely establishes honre'ver is that after neady two (2) derudet of trying thcse safeguards simply at> nrr-f-SiiA&-itl actud pracfice. Any ni.echanisrn of governance that,.consistently dcmonstrates immunity from'" ?iccounrai-:iiiry*ll6guards is anatherna to the Constitution, especially if that mechanisrn involves Bjllions of public funcis. In a similrvan, the Exeguti're's SPF violates constitutional accornability because it: (a) evades 'collective ar:.d deliberative process of budgeting public funds; (b) b"i"S l*op surns disirensed on tlrc F-'lxciutive's sole discretion, allows divereion of ftrnds to any purpose without practical limits. Worse, the .r"rff-budget fiurds evade
congressional oversight
al

rogether.

Fourth, d'ic--ortj;r;c*--fiurding and utilization

Systern" is an acf

of ihe "Por.k Barrci

lgravt: -fhe Executive's r,rse of the various lump srunJ discretior,,ary fi.inds, Branch. including the SPF, constitrltes undue delegation since each cornponent fund lacks a cleat standarcl. I'icir: instance, the Executive spends billions from the Malampaya F'und: (n) rvitlrout strbmitting it to thg buJgetary process; and (b)

of

abuse

of

discretjon by'the Executive and tr-egislative

telying on the vague starrdard of "such other purposesl'.s The combination of these two factors is stark: Iteports now indicatg that P900M of the Malampaya has been "lost" and has ended up in the hands of one rrotorious "fake NGO"; The Executive has not dcrried this, and only insists that it occurred undes the "previeius administrf,Iion". In the sarne vein, the COA Report establishes that both the Executive and the Legislative branches repeatdly abuse their discretion ir utilizing the PDAF. Based orr pape{ safeguards, it should be impossible fu PDAF funcJs to end up in the hands of legislators, tleir relatives

Presidential Decree 910,.Section 8 of which reads: "--Section 8. x x x production share on service conbacb and similar payments on the exploration, dev-eloprner.t and e-xploiation of arerg5r resourceq shall form part of a Spa:iat F und to be used to finance energr resource developrn'rrt and exploiation progfiuns and projects of the go1'ernment urnd for spch other puToses as may be hereafter dir.ecte.l by thp

Prcridssl."

'l'hc {_t}A R*porr details several iastances whe',: PDAF of altied interest* n*r by tegislatars or their fr:nds evecr end ; ; "qa*"i"**i""s onined or
farnilies.

l,trcal {}overnrncrrt fixlc experirnent fhat Yi*:lates tl"rc m*nr.latc $f the Ucire' I-he pdoritizes the funr.ti..g arld efnpoqtef{$e{rt of Lccal Goveff}tneftt tegislatgrs yho aY1xtts cited ratianale of rln" liD,'f ft is to emPo\r'er nationai rctionale is legally and factrnlly i*farrned,o *,5 ro thc needs of their distticts. The this respor:sibtlity ts- qorre{n f!aw.ed. The l-ncal {iriverfirnent code assigprs national.legisl*ars *yo* asrrl loeai gilverrlrncnl cltmcils. ldlse lnportanriy, and are certaialT aot as soend rE$s.r of their time !r the Seaate and the Horr*" lI"*f.-Sg."Ui. as I oca I {T( }vcrnrnent offi cials'
atld The 1gB? Constinrtion srands as the uttirnate check agait'rst abuse pt#I" corruption. Its de;ring characteristic is its ability. to provide t-u-r.*"".** is &e tf when neither c.5 "!-.,, r"',i' .-,.lini-r.!.Lranches irre interested in giving ift*t of ssrns exact situation o.,, *uticrri finds itseif in today. The repe;ting-cyctes aad and the coA Report show that textual safeguatds in the Constitutiaa sanrtes ase ftrtile chccks r>n the Pnrk Barrei-System' Worse, both poiitical btanches have officialll, inatle it clear that they see nothing intrin''icdly "P"q with the pork lJarrcl Sisrcrrr clcspite thc iravoqit wreal:s on basic cunstitutionel pgnciples. The cturcni aclminisiatinn's insistence on its integ;riry, is not only irrelevant to the c6lstiturional question, but it is also aoi a safcguard *gsi$$t futuce abuse* The c*nstiruticndity of a governance rnechanism shouid not and daes ftot clepenr.r ()il the persooal- iht*g"ty cf the occuparrl Tke eanirorrment arrd public rcaction ls becoming uncertain- With dre curreae impassq petitio*er, .* only iook tc the constiartion aod the Hoaoable c,aurt forredre$;.-ilhe mic of lrrv, nct politics ot greed mu.ct prevail

o'llgtlq llarrel Systern" is a suptrfluous' costly and failed Fifth, the t}rat

This is a llcrition for Ce*iorari r+d Prohibitioa with Pr.ryer for the Issuancc <tf zr 'l'cttrporlry ltestraining ordet a'.Jf ot li'/rlt of Prclimina4t Infunctioa {the "ilstanr l)etition') filed uader Rule 65 of the liules of Courq **"tir,gto ;$nul and sei asidq the Pork Barrel Systern prgseal!-embcdied in rh. *i;s6s of the Genef,al Appropdations +.t fCiA? "f x)13 qrovidiag for ih" I,qgislatufe's Prioriry Develogment Assisasce'Frnd q1*{ rqfacement thaeto, *rJg *" Exesutivc;r *iors.h:rrrp s$sn" di+retionary funds ccllaquidly referred ro a$ the Siiecial Puqpose Funtts" Both cotnponeflts of the Pork Bffiel Syrtr* are inclu,r-le.l anrl idq-trie4 irr the National Expeaditrue Prograrn of 20146 with increascd allocrrtions.

1.1.

There is a nced for z defnitive ruliag from the Honorable Court on.the matter of rvhether tire "Pork Barrel Systern" is tonstirutional or not.'

7.2.

The full text of the r.\ational li:rpendinrre Prog"am fot 2014 is h tttr: / /nnng.d trrn. g.*'-r.pb;!pagr:- rd=668

av.aiiabie

at tte DBMs websie

at

Firsg the f)rcsitJent's statement dated 23 AugustZUIS claims that "there is aothing intrin*-ically wroagi' with ttre '?otk Berrel System". Tbis nores the sheer stmir: rhc pr.rrk barrel cau$$ on the priaciples of Separatioa of Powes and Accountability. Sy virtue of the ancrrnalous existence it beers, the *Port< B*srct h.$rcsr" intrinsically

1.3.

!s

u*canbtit$ti*c!*! *nci must be

c*mpletely abandr-rrrcd.

System Philconsa w" Enriqua **d, r-awyes Agsissi rranapaly as,d Pouerty: us. Secrctaqt of Bu@et are rendered inapropos tp the c-urrent csntext coasidering thc rccent fiodi"go of the COA relating ta ;he acts of p-ublic officials belonging to both the Executive and l*gisiative branches. Coupled with the official reactions of the Executive and the Legislative, there is

1.4. Second, thc rwo (2) cited precedeats in defen^se of the Pork Barrsl

a need to properly channel their cfforts ori the field

rria lter r.

appropriation

of

burtgetary and

Third, as thc funding and the impleinentatio* sf the "Fr:*. Barrel System" arnounts trt gravi: abuse of discretion of which elfficials lrclonging ta both the Execudve and l-,egislative are cited of being participants g,ul Cbrf $efott), i"diti"l review of those acts is inescapabl*. 'Ihir is in tecognitioa af the doctrine that when the Executive and the Legislative braaches are assailed to have conrirnitted unconstitutional acts, it is the duty of the Hoaorable C.ar1gt to step in.

1.5.

Fourth, the steadv increa.se in allocatioas to Lump surs and discretionar.v funds will be reaching rxrheard of anrowrts - P44g.95 Billion in 2074 - coalescing too much of government resources within the discretisfl of a single i$dir.idual - the President - with Congress b*i"g both incepable and disinterested in checking ir.
the centiaued existence of the "Fork Barrel System" cannot be left at the ctscretion of the political brdaches who may revise or reforrn it at wrll rcgardless of the systanls fepugna.rice.
Fiaally, considetiag the patent unconstitrtioarality of the "?ork Barrel System" and t?re lurancial and social costs it ueateq a deiaitive ruling by tre Honosble Court is needed such drat the tcm (2) political brancho oi goverament lxd:ll be so guided es rrot to even atternpt to recreate or re&shion: a suktitrxe for the system in the future.

7.6.

7.7- Fi&tLlI'r vierv oliteintrinsic uaconstitstionatity,

1-8.

will be shown belcu,, by maiaainiag the .?ork Barrel System,, ard its components - (a) rhe PDAF or auty af irs versions; and O) *" Executive's lump sum, discretionary frrnds, respondents are perpetuaring a

l.g.

.-As

r$ay be served witir pit:atlin5p, $srttcr,s and cttter. lcgt*l pr()ct$$e$ q:f the l lo**rable (lqiurt ert thr:ir' *ffice at the Btxeau ef 1'recsury, Felacic del Gobe&ador Bldg", Intrarnuros, lv{anila
2.7

Legisiative l)epartment of participates anrl collclrrs with all apprapmationand xevenue Bills enacted by fhe House of Representatives. Respondent Senate may be served with pleadings, notices aad other legal prace$ses of the Flonorable Couf,t at &eir office at GSIS Headquarters Br:ilding, Financial Center, Rcxas Blvd., Fasay Gty.
I

Rcspr>nri:nr Scaatc

sf the Phitippines is onc of thc lir*:rches of rhe the Fhilippine g+verffneat- Respondent Senate

Rcsponrlcnt { lorrsc of Rcprcscntativcs of thc Phdippincs is one of the branches of the Legislative Departme*t of the Ptrilippine goverffnetlt. Responclent I Iouse of Representativbs is primarily responsi}le for the eaactrnent of all revcnue and ariff bills of the P"hitippinfs, as well as appropriation rrleasu{es. llcspondent l-Iause may be served udth pleadings, notices and other legal prr;cesses of the Honorabie Court at thdir sfiEce at the House of Represenrativcs Complex, Constirutioa Flills, 1126 Quezon City. Consider.ing tirat the instant case involves the constitutionaiity of legisl*tive acts and cxccutive functions, and the foregr*ng respcnelents are all public cfEci*ls suecl in tireir official capacities, notice of this Petirion is likewise

2.8.

2.9.

given to the office of the Solicitor Genera!, Amoreolo Streeg l*S"*pi Yill*ge, Makati Ciry-.

ST+TEFMENT 8F FACTS AND ANT-CEI}ENT

PRPCEE$ING$
funds ia the following caregories: {a) the Legislative branches pDAF; and &} the Executivets varitrus inmp sum and discretionary frndq tai<en together as {he
SPF.

3.1. 'Fhe Pork Barrel System is embodied in rhe anaual allocatian of

The Legislative compontrrt of the '?ork Barrel Sysfean"' was i"il*lly esriblished dururg the terna of Presi*nt Corazon Aquino with the creatiosr of the Counrry Wide Development Fund f'CDF:] in lgg0 wirh arouod E-5 billion in annual fir*ding;
,,

3.2.

3.3. The currr"nt f<rrrn <lf the l,egislative

Estsada irr 2000.

the PDAF, qrhich was created during the time of President Joseph Eiercito

pork Barrel is designated

as

The renaming of the CDF into PDAF was pteceded by pubiic outcry steftiniag from the exposes thaf firnds alloeated for the CDF wer squaaderid.

3.4.

" 'l'he avorve.d prupose of both the Executive antl the l,egistative then w*s to *Illil;dllll\{" the Cl)F and institute safuplards that rvill lrevcnt abttscs Frotn rrccttrritt.q.
3"5.
'"

pflp(:r cntiile*t "'Untlcrsfantling ttre Pork I3*lrel", then Spcrrlict l)r*spero C. Nellp-ales and Cong- ljdcel C- I.agrx**, Chairperson of the I lodsc Committee on Appropriationsl0 l"Nograles Paper'), cited that the currcnr forr"r-r of legislative pork barrel has incoqporated several layers of safeguards, to wir:

3.6. ln a ?()l? position

'ol''lrc c,rtrqt'ssional "s()ff" and "hafil"' proiccts afc definitcly firr dtpalturcs from thc original i\merican pork ballel systLyn :rnrl fi:txn thc practice r:f tirc oitJ Congrcss bcf<irc it was abolishctJ by i\'[arcris. Nc>w, the trtilization of the (lDl; or Pl]Ali is stricrly circurnscribcd by a shortlist or rnenu of qualified ptoiects. requirement of utiliry and relevance, sttingent procutemcnt and public bidding; pr:ercccltrre$, accouli.table irnplerneating agencies and mandatory post-audit review by the Cornmission on Audit
(COA), among othrr safcguards."

fruther assurarlce, it uras also asserted in the Nogaalcs P:rpcr tir:rt "lrrrrovitfivc h{t:asrrcs" adtlcd yct anottrcr lcvcrl of protection against abusr, to rvit

3.7. As a fomr of

'ofhe ncw lcadership of the ifouse of Represenatives has dkected, far further traflsparency and accorxrtability, the pubtrication in a coagessicnal website all of the projects and prograrns iclcntificd by Flouse Members under their respec-+ive -fhe Iists of "!i{-}ft" ancl "hard" proiects. website will als+ include the progre$$ starus and accomplishment of the proiects. Tiris innovation will afford the public the opportuaify to assess the importance of a'rd the need for the congressonal projects and enhance the pcople's right to make reasonable protests and cdmplaints."
each year's Geaecal Appropriations Acg t*re purpsrted textual safrguards have been set in phce far the l*gisletrx'e's FDAF. The 2009 General={pp:ep drde'ffi-Att for iastance contains :
"Special Provision 'Ihe amount 1. Use and Rciease of the Fund. appropriated 'used h':reia shall be to fund priority programs and profects under

3.8. As reflected in

r{}

Undesanding the Pork Barrcl; Speaker Prospero C. Nograles, FIon. Edccl C. Lagman, is rvail'able at harrel.pslf. htp:/lwebarchive-or,r;Avcl;12012t){171459$5/http1/rqrrv.congress.gos.ph/pdaC/aelvs/pork

the f"en*lloinf I l:g;rcy Agerda nf rhe aetiq!flal gcvernrnerrt, **{t slrall i* r"tlr:tsrtl rlirt'ctly fi-r thc ir:rpicrrrenti*g age'ncitrs as intticatcd heregrrder, t* wir x:'x PRGVIDED, That i" ttiq procurement of corfflron-use strpplies, the implernenting agencies shall adhcre to the price list and rhe des. and regul*tio* tc be issuec by the Goverrrrreat Frocurement Policy Board.*,
.

.1

3-9. Similar safeguards appear kr the zA1-2 Getreral Appropriatiorrs Act' wirh respect to ideatification ef prciects and beneficiaries for'iristtnce:
"shali conform to thc priority list, standard or desrgn preparcd by each implcnrcrtrirtg:ulrflcy... prrrft'rcrrcc sh:rll bc.gi"criro-pgrjccrs loeated in the r{dr to (rrh class mtrnicipalities or indigents ideatified rurder the National l{ousehold rargeting systei for poverry

Retiucti*n by thc t)swD. For this puqpose, the implemenrng lgery shall sui:rnir to Congpe$s said prhriry list, siantlarel 1yr desigr within ninery (90) days from effectiviry orthi, A*."

3.1s.

sum, discrerionary funds for the Execurive gru;h. Althor:g$ tlre composition and nature of the fixrds vary from year to year, a" co171,non denomrnator is tha* the-r aggregate amount oriotal steadil.'increaseil fsom one year to the next.

lTrp lonrained

In thc same .vein, l*ir

year,s Ge,,e{al Appropriations Ast

brilliant and rrterpti*g minds possessed by govemment officials aid private individr:als urhn saw rhe pork Ba*el system *ioo temptiag to refuse-

3.11. Baseil on the confluenc* two (ll recent everts, it appears howevern that all th.esc post-CDF scarntf innovetioos were useless against the

3'12' On 16 August 2l13,the Commissio* on Audit releasedits Speciat {S1.Ofi8S._1.p"rt No' 2a1243, entitled Priorigt DevelEaent -,ltsfutaare Fssd {Pt'aF}'asd veriatts InJiastrv$ures ;!du{xg rrcal'prqe* {vrr-pfl enmining PDAF e4pendia*e and itrrplementatioa fr; zw7 io 200g.
3"1?.1.According to the coA Reporq the toral allocaticras fGr PDAF qg_d VILI] rq 3fuegears 200i to hOg asrounted ro p 79.87S Billion.

3-72-2.af this amount, the coA Reporr,s Audit was only able to {o\r P8.374 tsillion in PDAF ,il""r**, ad p32.664 Billion in VILP releases, or 589/o of tota] PDAF' ,.L*", aad, izo/a af total YILP releases for the period"

The

voluminous

hFp: /l{:oegpy.Fh /Ci \\ St},U20 I :

!c,l

/SAO

is accessibre frorn the cba *ebsire ar }:pg" Reporr20 l2-0-t

lrDAF.pd;-.

3.13. Significantly, the COA Rrpoa's exifanalion of its inabiliw tu audit the entire amnunt erf PIIAF rclea$*s reve*.led the inherent vulr:er*bility af the Pork Barrel System ta unaccsun&ble spending practices. '{he CO:L Repo*

stats:

*,

rqreated quests, with ccxnplete schedule of releases per legislator &ora f'IiAF fae soft prolects and VILP for hard ptoi**- Only the schedule of releases frorn YILF for hard proiects idsrtified by the tegistarors named therein was provided coveriag releases of P 32.347 Billlcn ( fable 9) druing CYs 2007 ta 2009 sihich was formd deficient."l?
re&rsal, the CCA had to be tesorxceful chech the implementing agencies, i.e. DPWI-I, and riuas able to discover th* ihe schedr:le it was provided by the DBM "excluded aromd P 69.2b7 Billion""

'The DBM coultl nst p:ovide the Tars"'despite

3.t4" In view sf the DBMs

and

Uafortuaately, without the DBMs daa, the COA noted that, [t]he co'scwed legislators of such releases, cannot, however, be identified."

3;15. Sorne of the maior fitdi*gs of the COA Repcrrt inciudq

3.15.1.Despite the rule that each lqislator has "fixed allacatioas $.e . P 70 Million for Coagressrner,$, a total of S*veatyFour f?:y-*tors cx_11!l their respective allocations.l3
3.15.2.Despite the de in that expenditues should be within the respective distticts, the DBM released firndt: far

proiects outside

the

legislative districts

of

qporerodng

congressmen.la

Implemen*ing Agencies f'IA') qrith "lo administrative aad technicd capabilities to implement thi project."
3.15.3.Funds -were released

to

.- 3"15.4.Funds rrrere released to implemeaeng ageacies "for ao specific purpose ot foc proiecb outside of the IAs mandated
firyrctions.

'

,'

3.16- Worsg 'Jie CCA Report also forxrd out that the IAs of the Execntive branch, iastead of providing the necessary *checli' oa the PDAF and VILP releases, virnrally aided and abetted &e abuse, to wic tz t3

'

14

COA reporq page 5. cf. Tabh 10 of the COA Report. cf. Tabie 11 of dre COA Report.

i,.
I

'ofhe trAs ic turn, uscd the fi.msis withuut rlue-r*gard t*'existing rules and tegulations. Subsantial ernotxrts qrerie tffinsfweC to NGOs, without *ny appragriation las. qrr *tdisrasrce agtherizricg $rch tratrs{br antt -*rere trsed for proiects,*bt eligible r.:ades the pfogfarrr Worse, the ffpofted proiects we{e $upPo{td with questionable and/+r sprrcis$c documents. Infrastnrctur.e prsieets wef,e'not effectively implmented as . a nurrber wtre ffiIfid deficient or implemnted in pdvate lots, arnoag athas; vliich is under the law."l

T"T*O
3.17. A ke3' finding of &e COA ho'irever involves the undeniable po\rrer *rat the legishtor dkectly wields in the ast;ral implementation of the
proiects firn<ied by his PDAF. 3.17.1.The COA Report establishes thst NGC rccipients '1rere selected ern the basis alone of the pu{pofid endorsement th* supporting lc'gislators."
.by

3.1?.2.Worse, deqpite existing laws a':d adrninistrative regulations, the COA Report found that the legislatols power to select the NGO came without pubhc bidding a.s "required uader GPPB Resolution No. 7?.2C0f-".16
sre{e rn*de to NGOs according to the Repo4 reflectingthe surn of P 6.156 Billioa in total

3.18. A total cf 82 releases

COA

3.18.1.In complete defiance

of

existing rules

and

regulations, the COA Report fornd that of these redpimt NGOs, Six (6) were incorporated by the legishtors tlsrselves cr" drdc relatives.

3.19" The COA Report adds that "the ignpleangnletion of various livelihood proiects'" frraded by a tr*al of P52"40S l\fitliori PDAF releases wef,e similady t"i"t*a R,A. 9184 was fiauted. Proiec*'\Eref,e not a'lvertised and ri*ply *awarded to suppliers ideatified by the lefulator a*d/oa of questioaable
leg*t aod physical existsncc."

infustnrcture pxrfects were constnrcted 'fu private lots urithout any documsrt to sullport the tum over of such properties to the govemment'rl? ifl coruplete defiarrce of the Honorlble Court's landmark decision m Pascual us, Seixebqr
cf. COA Reporg pag 14. ctl COA Report, Part III, Cbapter 2. cf. Table 43, COA Report.

3.20. Not e'ien the Hcnorable Courds nrlings and decisrosrs T/ere enouglr to stop or channel the abuses. The COA found that Fifu-four {54}

t.

l.
I I

!.

i,

of Public flFork.'"E

3.21. Frorri 09 july to 15 Septernber ry12, the implenerting *g*cies were asked by the COA to corruneilt or their audit highlight$. Not dl IAs
submitted cornment$ buq of those u*ro did, seveal requested for extensio'ns.

5,n- Of all the implerrrenting agencies who submitted cornmen cstothe fiodirp cf the COA. Tearrt the defense nnade by the Natitmal Livelihoad
Development Corporation fIJLDC') is the rnost telling in ternrs of hon' &r tegislative encroachment in project implemeatation has goqe. The COA Rryoct deails the NLDC's cornrnents thus:

"rl-

firlli, re-t-ie4-en the Office oi th* Legislators to superrrise and ascertain project implementation. loar 'NI-DC has been looking into i,atedocking personalities, esablishfurg the legal and physical existence of NGOs endorsed by the legislntors, blacklisted a number cif NGOs, ffid has initially epressed hesibace ia being part of the PDAF tation as eady as l.{overnber
2008...

'\iLDClas

The proiect implementation is direcrly pacicipated by the propoaeot llg;islators."

3.23states:

in its list of f,ecsmnlendations, the COA Report expticitly

-Finally,

legislators. I-.imit participation in the irnplemenatioa of' PDAF proiect to identification of proiests and IAs."'

'Tor

3.24- The COA Report's release coincided with the growing oncern about a scandal involvir.,g solr:.e plO Billi<xr of pDAF releases. Reports based ofl ssrotrr affidavits submired to the Nafional Bureau of lnvestigation isdicated *eat sevesal legislatars were acting in cooperatioa vtrith ths accased individuats in siphocing PDAF releases into "fake NGOs""
.

3.25. In 13 Ar,gust 2013, the secretary of rhe Deparanent of Justice indicated that it is investi6mting the scandal and will in f*ct be prosecuting the legislators concerned since the Department was "able ts canfirrn the
involvereent of some la',r'makers", to urit:

'1ffe cannot mention names at thjs poiot beiause of the pendiag investigation by the NBL We are still in thg process of validation but we were already able to confirm the involvesrent of some lawrnakers, both from the House and the Senate. The filing will be

tE

G.fi- No. L10405 TiGd-Zy t-recemr:elJ*6'

,-4#p&

!l t.

dicated by evidencc and will be done in a feff tlreek$,"le

3.26. F<rlloudng thcse two evnts, the

ke is nct ia fav*r bf abelishing rhe

PDAF.

Paesident initialty announced that

11

3.27. Bf 23 August llBhouiever, as stated a.bove, the Pr:sident issued *trt is a Stateivrent of even date indiatingthat, time to *bolish the PDAF." 3.28. Despite this, the Geseal Appropriationq Act fsr 2013 contisuec to carry bdth forms of the '?ork Barrel Systerrr'* by prov:dirg arrraunts pertaiaing to the Legi"-lative's PI)AF which amounted in tatal to P?4.79 Bdlion,

' while the Executivc's lump surrq discretionary frmds urclude but, is not limited to, fhe following

" " ' o . "

E*govemmeflt Funds Unprograrnmed F'rnds - which will be increa-sed fur 2014 by P22B from last yea^t. Budgetary support to Government Corporations F''.rnd Intelligcncc Fiund Priori* Socjal and Economic Proiects Futrd

3.29. Similady, the National Expenditue Pragram fcr 2014 csnains funCing fo: both cornponents of the Pork Basel System:
3.29"1..'I'he Legislative cornponurt Systern is pegged Billiosr. ^tP25.24

of the pcrk Barrsl

. 3.2g.2.Oo the oths hand, the funds *king rp the Bxecutive cclmprlrirnt of the Pork Barrel System are rryeated frorn the 2013 Fiscal Year with the folkming new lurnp surrL
discretionary frrntls :

Tax Expendirures Fund -P26.9 Billion Feasibility Sru<iies Fusrd - P 400 Mllion

3.30" Thsough subsequent sgtsme{rts, Resp*aderrt Seclegr}' of Bud*et has confirrrred thd'PresicienCs statement that the "?otk Barrel Systern* pe,taiaiag to the FDAF rvdl not be abolished and instead wilt sirnply be
reforrred.

3.31. ln anothcr D^tatement, Respo*dent Secregry of Budget maictairred

te

'DOJ Set.b File Raps Vs. Congtessmen, Senators Over PDAF So-" Tl*.sca T. Panti, I{anila ?imes, 13 Augr.rst 2013, available at htp:l/u'rrnr..manilatinies.netldeFset-tefi,e-raps*vs-congre$smen-se6et$rs-ovefpder{-srrirn/n0%3/.

the need for drc lixccutivc to have acce$$ to its compcuent of thc 'Tork Barrel System" embodied ilr th,. various lump surn, discrefionary firncls, as n'ell as similar funds that cxist off-budget 30
't.

3.32. Flence, this Pctition. ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE INSTANT PETITION FOR CERTIORARI AND

,"

PROHIBITISN

THE HONORABLE COURT i{AS

OYER THA INSTANT PETITION
A.

JURSTDTCTTON

THE QUESTION OF THE PORK BARREL

DOMAIN.

SYSTEM'S INTRTNSIC CONSTITUTIONALITY IS SOTELY \TIITHIN THE HONORABLE COTJRT'S

B.

BRANCHHS CANNOT USE THE POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE TO EVADE JUDICIAL REVIEST ON THIS MATTER.

THE EXECUTIVE AND

LEGISI.ATTVE

II
THE
A.

PORK

BARREL

SYSTEM

IS

UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

IMPLNMENTAIION.
B.

THE PORK BARREL SYSTEM YIOIATES SEPARATION OF PO\TERS BY ATLOWING CONGRESS TO INTRUDE INTO THE EXECUTI\TE DOMAIN OF PROJECT

THE PORK BARREL SYSTEM RENDERS THE EXECIJTIVE A}iD . THE LEGISI.ATIVE
AI{D

BRANCHES PRATTCALLY INCAPABLE OF CHECKING EACH OTHER IN BUDGETAF.Y OFFENI}ING THE PRINCIPLE CF CHECKS

OTTTEN MATTERS,

THERESY

AND BALANCES.

C. THE PORK BARREL SYSTEM OFFENDS THE

ACCOUNTABILITY PROVISIONS

OF' THE

DEMON$'I'R!{TTNC OVER THg PAST DECAI}SS TI=IA:T TT i! _-.!*IFERVIOUS TO PRACTICAL CONTROL AND ACCOUNTABI LITY rv{BASU RBS.

III
TI{E

FUNDING J-hIN CONTINUED IIUFLEMENTATION OF THE PORK BARREL SYSTEM

AMOUNTS

TC ACTS OF
IV

GRAVE ABUSE

O}"'

DISCRETION,

.-

THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONSITUTION ON LOCAL AUTONOMY AND THE LOCAL

GOVERNMENT CODE.

SIJPERFLUOUS AI..ID UNNECESSARY MECHANISM THAT OFFENDS

THE PORK BARREL SYSTEM IS A

THE FORK

CONTINUED NON.REALIZATION, IF NOT VIOIATION OF YARIOITS OUTRIGI{T

CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATES, IT{CLUDING THE
prsc(j,_s..groN

ITARREL SYSTEM ENABLES THE

PROSCRIPTION AGAINST POLITICAL DYFIASTIES.

THE FIONORABLE COURT HAS JURISDICTION OVER THE INSTANT

PETITION.

I.

a.

THE, QI,ESTION OF THE PORK

BARREI, SYSTEMIS CONSTITUTIONALITY IS

SOLELY

THE HOI{ORABLE COURT'S DOMAIN. 'Ihe President has officially stated that there is nothing "rnrinsieally

WITHIN

wrong" with the Pork Barrel System even i{ on the basis of the COA lleport anil the repeated sca*dals over the decades, it has been establisheci that the said

safery and wclfbrc of the lrilipino people. Chaos u,ili ens'.re ou: nation. The blecding fi:rrst stop flolv.

in the strets

*f

Pctitioncr is rrarlr'. rvilling and able to f;ost an Lriuncticn borrd in such rcasonable a{nount rvl':ich rhis Flonorablc Court may fr:r in ihe cxcscise of its sound discredrxr to :inswcr for darnages which the Respontleni might sustain should it finallv hc dctcrmincd that petitirxrer is not entitled to thc issuance of a restrainiftg ordcrf rvrit of prelinrinary iniurction" Fetitioner is clcady cntitled to the reliefs prayed foq and part reliefs con$isf of enioir:ing and rcstraining the respondcnts.

of

such

PRAYER WHEREFOI{E, Iretitioners respectfully pra}r rhat this Honorable Court:

a. b.
1.

Give duc rorirsc to the instant Petition; Inrmediarciv issue a Temporar). Restrairi"g f)rder *nd"f ar Writ Prelinrinarv I njurcticin enioining

of

Thc Excc'tive r

Secretary, Department

of Budget and

Managemerrt and those acting frx and/or under them, frnm

fi:leas$g;fulds

Prir.rrity ller.'elopmenr Assistance Fund; and (?) the various lnfrasrruenues and tocal Projects FundJ; the lixecutivets lump s*m, discrctionary appropriations in the presefit Genetal Appropriations Act af zals excepr tire calamity Fund and contingent Fund; and the Executivc's off-budget hmp sum, discrerionary fi:nds inciuding the &Ialampaya _._.- _Fund and.rhe.Secial Furd;

pdority I)evel*pment Assistance Fund [ar its cofirponents the: fi)

in relation to the tegislanue,s

Eeeking

Csogression

Narional Expenditure Prograrn sf 2fr14 pertaini'g to the "unified" Priority nevcloprnent Assisrance Fu*d and the Execurive's l*p surn, discretion-arv appropriations except the Caiarmry Fund and Contingent !-uad; aoC

of

the p.xtions

of

the

'

&ss-ceatiguigg sdth any further p-roceedingp reievant tq arising or-rt of ar in connection with the sarne;
.'.tcrinrr

2. rhe Philippinc senate and the House of

ir,t sndlor rrnder thern frnm toLi-- ,'^ i- *l-^i-

Represenradves and

Prioritr' l)er.clopment Assistance fiund; and {2} rhe \narious Infrastrtrcrures and tocrrl Proiects FuncI.J; anrl thc lixecutive's lump s*m, ciiscretionary funr{s excepf the Calarnity Fund and
Caatingcrt liund; and

3. The National Treasurer, from elry act *rat seeks to cnforce the {a} Ilrio:in' Developrnent Assistaace Ftrnd; {}) the Yadous

f*fra*trucrurcs and Local Proiects Fu;rd; (c) the Executive's lump sum, cliscretionary' funds except the Calamiti' Fund and &e Contingent liuad, under thc General Appropriations Act of 2013
and othcc iaws.

c.

A&er furthcr prr:ceedinSr Ssant the insftat Pelitioa:

' , .

1.

clech.ring the (1) the Executive's Lump Surrq Discretionary frnrds, except the Calamity fund and the Contingcct fund; {2) thc Priority Development Assistance Fund; *nd {3) the l:arior.rs lnfrastructures and Local Profects Fund or any

other permutation thereo{ null and void

uncorrstitutional:
2.

ior

b*log

dcclaring the assaileci (1) the .Execudve's Lwnp Sturl l)iscrctionary fixrds, except the Calamiry tirnd and the {-:;;rir;i;,rl -fua-d; {2) the Priarity Developmen: Assistarice Funci; and (3) the Various Infrastmcttues and Locai Proiccts Fu*d or aay other perrnutatian therec,f null and vriiel, ft;r being acts of [Iravc abuse of discretjmr:
olderirrsr the Executive Secretrry. the Departmcnt of lludgct and Hanagefient, the lrtrational'freasurer and thcse acting for andfor under thern, to immediately cease any cxpentliture under {a} rhe Prioriq' lJevelopmenr As]^istar]ce Funcl; ib) the tr'arious Infrastrucnrres and L,ocal Projects Iii-u-id i)r any permutatit:n thereo* and {c} the Lixecutive's l,i:mp liruno lliscretio*ar;' &xrds, exccFt the Calffnir.y fund

J.

'.uni tire Contingenr find;

rlppr<ipriations Act
-4 .f.

under the

Generai

af

2013'and other laws;

{-'*ngrrss of all preseptly off-budget, lump

cnlcr.inrf rhe inclusion irr budgetary cieliheraanns with th*

sur}l, limited fo, proceecls

discrcricr:arv fi.*ds urciuding llut not from rirc h.ialampaya project or the bfaiampava Fund, rcnritr:irrces from the Philipolre Arnusemenr and Gaining ("e:ri:crrrrion and rhe Philippine Chariry Sweepst-akes Of6ce or rire i'.rxecutive's Sociai Fund;
5.

Ordc:urg respo*dents Executive Secretary md/or i)eparrment of Budget and Management to:

i{clease

to the Commission cfi Audit *nd to

the

public the complete schedule/list of legrslators who have availcd of their PD;\i; and YIi-.t] ftonr the irars 2003 to 2013, speci$rilrg tlrc usc of fhc funds, thc profcct i)r :lctivify antl rirc rccipit'rit t'lrtific* err individuals, ancl all perticent dat.l therero.

foIalampaya proiect or the Malampaya Fmd, rcmittances from the Philippine Amusernent and (ianring Corparation and the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes tlffice or the llxecutive's Social Fund frorn 2003 to 2013, specifiTing the use of the funds, rhc project or activity and thc recipient enddes or individuals, and all pcrtinent data theieto.

the pubLc the usc of the llxecutive's Lurnp Sum, l)iscretionary funds, inchrding thc praceeds fiorn the
llelea.se

to the Commission on Audit and to

cxpenditure of all off-budget, himp surn, discretionary funds in the annual National
Iixpenditure Program submitred to Congress.

f-trcnceforth provide derailed rep(rrts

of . the

6. prohibiti:rg all public respondents herein from proposirrg allec:drg, in:l::*;lgrfrd approving in any National lixpenditwe Prioritv l)n'clopment Assistance Fund; (4 the \&rious
Progranr, (lnrcral Appropriations Act or other legislation, the (1)

Infrasrructrucs and Local Projects Fwrd; (3) the Execuove's l,ump Sum, f)iscretjonnry funds, except the Calamiqv firrrd and the Contingcnt ftrnri; (4) any item, fi:nd or ;rppropriation similar in operadon rhcrclo; (5) or anln item, fi"rnd or appropriation alloudng the allocation and disbursement of public frurds under the instruetion! recornrrlendation or direction of any legislative official or pcniorls acting for and,/or under thern; and

{-)
for.

ileclaring the iniunction permanent.

prayed

Oth.r reliefs just and equitable rintler the premise$ are likcwise

,{.iqv tur the City of Manila,

I{etro Manila, 27 August 2013.

GRECO

NIOUS BEDA B. LGICA

&{,#li'Y. JOSE MALVAR YTLLEGAS JR.

,&,
.t