DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY

FRANCES ANN GALANZA

11284374

The Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) is a discretionary fund in the

Philippines which is available to members of the Congress and is designed to
allow legislators to fund small-scale infrastructure or community projects which
fell outside the scope of the national infrastructure program. 1
The Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) is designed to fast-track public
spending and push economic growth. This covers high-impact budgetary
programs and projects which will be sourced out of the savings generated during
the year and additional revenue sources. Funds used for programs and projects
identified through DAP were sourced from savings generated by the
government.2
Article VI of the Constitution provides that, "Discretionary funds appropriated for
particular officials shall be disbursed only for public purposes to be supported by
appropriate vouchers and subject to such guidelines as may be prescribed by
law." The Constitution did not prohibit such funds, in fact it even has a proviso for
its disbursement.3
On the same section of the same article in the Constitution, paragraph 2 states
that, No provision or enactment shall be embraced in the general appropriations
bill unless it relates specifically to some particular appropriation therein. Any such
provision or enactment shall be limited in its operation to the appropriation to
which it relates." The Constitution should be read as a while and each provision
should not be made to stand on its own.
____________________________
1
2

N.p.. Web. 30 Mar 2014. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priority_Development_Assistance_Fund

Official Gazette, 5 october 2013. Web. 30 Mar 2014. <http://www.gov.ph/2013/10/05/constitutional-and-legal-bases-

for-the-disbursement-acceleration-program-dap/>.
3

1987 Constitution of the Philippines, Article VI

The framers of the Constitution did not intend such provision to counter the
Constitution itself and to act as a prohibition on discretionary funds. Paragraph 2
should be interpreted as to avoid totally unspecified appropriations.4
To specify projects is part of the regular lawmaking power of Congress and does
not encroach upon the power of the Executive to implement the same. Indeed
the lawmaking power was conferred to Congress by the Constitution.
In Article VI of the Constitution, Section 1 provides that, The legislative power
shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a Senate
and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by
the provision on initiative and referendum." And in Section 24, All appropriation,
revenue or tariff bills, bills authorizing increase of the public debt, bills of local
application, and private bills, shall originate exclusively in the House of
Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments." 5
The constitutionality of the power of Congress to specify projects in the was
again upheld by the Supreme Court when the constitutionality of the PDAF was
questioned in LAMP v. Secretary, G.R. No. 164987, April 24, 2012 6. The
Constitution reiterates in its provisions that proposing and identifying of projects
by individual members of the Congress should not be held unconstitutional.
Sourcing funds from a particular item to fund a deficit in another item is not the
concept of the DAP. It cannot be that funds can be transferred from one
department to another. The Constitution is clear that, No law shall be passed
authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President, the President
of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of
_________________________
4

1987 Constitution of the Philippines, Article VI, Paragraph 2

1987 Constitution of the Philippines, Article 1, Section 24

LAMP vs. Secretary, April 24, 2012, GR NO. 164987

the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law,

be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their
respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations. 7
It is also clear in the General Provision on the Use of Savings in the General
Appropriations Act that, The President of the Philippines, the Senate President,
the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court, the Heads of Constitutional Commissions enjoying fiscal autonomy, and
the Ombudsman are hereby authorized to augment any item in this Act from
savings in other items of their respective appropriations. 8 The only possible
scenario here is that the official can only transfer funds from one project of his
department to another project within his department and not to any other
departments. Such acts are considered as encroachments on the departments of
the government is unconstitutional.
The legal basis for the DAP and PDAF are found in the Constitution. If these
were to be scrutinized and assessed alone, without the influence of the
politicians,

these

laws

are

Constitutional.

What

made

them

become

unconstitutional is the manner of how the people are using these laws to their
own advantage. Instead of upholding the Constitution and following the true
intent of what the framers of the Constitution intended, they used such provisions
of the Constitution to their own advantage which made the laws which is in
accordance of the constitution look like a violation of the Constitution. We must
presume that laws were made by Congress with good intention. Just because a
law can be used in a corrupt manner does not imply its unconstitutionality.

___________________________
7
8

1987 Constitution of the Philippines, Article VI, Section 25 (5)

General Appropriations Act, RA 10147, General Provisions on the Use of Savings, Section 59