Miriam: SC has power to rule on ‘pork’ cases

Ayee Macaraig

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

Sen Miriam Defensor Santiago says the Supreme Court can exercise judicial review in the PDAF cases

JUDICIAL POWER. Sen Miriam Defensor Santiago says the Supreme Court has the power to determine whether or not there was "grave abuse of discretion" in the pork barrel system. File photo by Leanne Jazul/Rappler

MANILA, Philippines – Should the government use a political or a legal solution to address the pork barrel scam?

Sen Miriam Defensor Santiago weighed in on the debate before the Supreme Court, saying the tribunal has the power to decide on the legality of the pork barrel.

A day after oral arguments at the Supreme Court, Santiago said the Court is not bound by the so-called “political question doctrine,” which holds that a court should refuse to decide an issue involving “the exercise of discretionary power by the executive or legislative branch of government.”

The matter was a key point of contention in the oral arguments on Tuesday, October 8. Santiago agreed with the petitioners in saying that the doctrine does not apply to the case.

“Constitutional scholars are united in the view that under the present Constitution, the Supreme Court is no longer inhibited from deciding political questions,” the senator said in a radio interview on Wednesday, October 9.

“The Constitution now provides that judicial power includes the duty of the court to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government, even in cases involving political questions,” Santiago added.

Santiago said the question in the cases on the pork barrel is whether or not the political branches of government or the executive and legislative committed grave abuse of discretion in spending public funds. 

She gave the following definitions:

  • Discretion – the public official’s power or right to act in certain circumstances according to personal judgment and conscience, often in an official or representative capacity
  • Abuse of discretion – a decision that is asserted to be grossly unsound, unreasonable, illegal, or unsupported by the evidence.

In the oral arguments, counsel for the petitioners Alfredo Molo III said, “There is grave abuse of discretion because the law on its face allowed them to do something against the Constitution.”

The Office of the Solicitor General though has said that the case is “not yet ripe” for a judicial solution because the executive and the legislative are still in the process of reforming the pork barrel system, what is called “the political solution.”

The Court is tackling 3 petitions questioning the constitutionality of the pork barrel or Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), and the so-called presidential pork or the use of the Malampaya fund for purposes other than energy development, and the President’s Social Fund (PSF).

The cases came on the heels of the pork barrel scam, where lawmakers channel their PDAF to fake non-governmental organizations in exchange for kickbacks amounting to 40% to 60% of ghost projects.

‘Puno people’s initiative not feasible’

Santiago also commented on the call of former Chief Justice Reynato Puno for a people’s initiative mechanism to abolish PDAF and the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).

The senator said that while the proposal was “idealistic and constitutional,” it was not doable.

“I am afraid that it will not be feasible because the number of signatures required [for] a petition is too high and can be subverted by vote-buying to convince voters to stay away,” Santiago said.

The Initiative and Referendum Act allows citizens to directly propose a bill but it has to be endorsed by at least 10% of the total number of registered voters nationwide. Of this 10%, at least 3% of voters in each legislative district must be represented.

By Santiago’s computation, the signatures of about 5 million voters are needed.

She said it will also be “too expensive” to conduct an information and education campaign for the voters to understand the bill scrapping pork barrel.

In place of the initiative, Santiago again pushed for the passage of the budget control and impoundment bill.

Santiago refiled the bill originally proposed by President Benigno Aquino III when he was a senator. The bill requires the president to seek Congress’ permission to impound appropriations. She said it preserves Congress’ power of the purse.

Recto: PDAF constitutional

Another senator also weighed in on the legal debate. Sen Ralph Recto said the PDAF is constitutional.

“What is being questioned I suppose is how it is being implemented and possible special or general provisions in the budget,” Recto told reporters on Wednesday. 

Recto said the oral arguments in court were informative but called on the Court to quickly decide before the passage of the 2014 budget. 

“It will enlighten everyone. It will define the powers of the legislative branch and the executive branch so this is healthy for all of us,” he said. “Remember there are many implications here, not only PDAF but also the Malampaya [fund].” – Rappler.com

 

Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Loading
Download the Rappler App!