The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday, June 2, acknowledged the pressing need to rule on consolidated petitions challenging the constitutionality of unprogrammed funds and special accounts embedded in the 2024, 2025, and 2026 national budgets.
During the continuation of oral arguments, former Senate President Franklin Drilon petitioned the High Tribunal for a swift decision. He pointed out that the executive branch is slated to submit the 2027 national budget proposal to Congress shortly after July this year.
Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo reassured the litigants that the magistrates are fully aware of the strict schedule governing the country’s fiscal legislation.
”We’d also like to let you know that the Court is conscious of the timelines in the budget process,” Gesmundo said.
Drilon, participating as an amicus curiae (friend of the court), argued that a prompt verdict is vital to establishing clear legal boundaries regarding unprogrammed appropriations for both state institutions and citizens.
”We are making this manifestation to respectfully urge the Court to decide on this case as early as possible preferably by Congress because the decision of this Court will provide guidance not only to the government but to the public in general as to this anima of unprogrammed appropriations,” Drilon said.
He further noted that ongoing political friction regarding alleged irregular insertions in the national budget makes definitive judicial intervention even more critical.
”That is why it is very critical, Your Honors, that this Honorable Court provide Congress and the public in general as to the guidelines of what is constitutional and what can be done with the unprogrammed appropriations,” he added.
The high-stakes legal debates are scheduled to continue on June 9, with the concluding round slated for June 16.
The legal battle consolidates multiple lawsuits filed by legislators, civic organizations, and private citizens. Among these are:
- G.R. No. 271059: Rep. Edcel C. Lagman et al. vs. Congress of the Philippines et al.
- G.R. No. 271347: Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III and Pantaleon “Bebot” Alvarez vs. Executive officials and Congress representatives
- G.R. No. E-02472: Filipinos for Peace, Justice and Progress Movement, Inc. vs. House of Representatives et al.
- G.R. No. E-04036: Edgar R. Erice and Leila de Lima vs. Senate of the Philippines et al.
The petitioners are targeting alleged spending increases introduced by the Bicameral Conference Committee, which they argue artificially inflated the national budgets for three straight fiscal years.
For the 2026 fiscal year, President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. signed the ₱6.793 trillion General Appropriations Act (Republic Act No. 12314) on January 5, which contains ₱150.9 billion allocated for unprogrammed funds.
Defending the government, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) has petitioned the SC to throw out the cases. The OSG maintained that unprogrammed appropriations are vital fiscal tools, arguing that because state revenue is finite, not all proposed public projects can secure immediate financing.
Consequently, these projects are categorized as standby line items that are only triggered when new funding streams emerge.