Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DAP
DAP
DAP
DAP
DAP
DAP
DAP
DAP
DAP
DAP
DAP
Issues
DAP
The Issues
ES
THE ISSUES
DAP
THE ISSUES
DAP
THE ISSUES
DAP
DAP
Held/ Ruling
DAP
HELD:
THE RULING
DAP
No law was necessary for the adoption and
implementation of the DAP because of its being
neither a fund nor an appropriation, but a
program or an administrative system of
prioritizing spending; and that the adoption of
the DAP was by virtue of the authority of the
President as the Chief Executive to ensure that
laws were faithfully executed. In such actions, the
Executive did not usurp the power vested in
Congress under Section 29(I), Article VI of the
Constitution.
DAP
THE RULING
However:
DAP, and all other executive issuances allegedly
implementing the DAP, violated Sec. 25(5),
Art. VI of the 1987 Constitution
DAP
THE RULING
DAP
THE RULING
THE RULING
DAP
(2) The funds to be transferred are savings
generated from the appropriations for their
respective offices; and
(3) The purpose of the transfer is to augment an
item in the general law for their respective offices.
DAP
THE RULING
DAP
THE RULING
THE RULING
DAP
Savings should be understood to refer to the
excess money after the items that needed to be
funded have been funded, or those that needed to
be paid have been paid pursuant to the budget.
There could be savings only when the PAPs for
which the funds had been appropriated were
actually implemented and completed, or finally
discontinued or abandoned. Savings could not be
realized with certainty in the middle of the fiscal
year; The funds for slow-moving PAPs could not
be considered as savings because such PAPs had
not actually been abandoned or discontinued yet.
THE RULING
DAP
At this point, the Supreme Court also discussed
that there is no executive impoundment in the
DAP. Impoundment of funds refers to the
Presidents
power
to
refuse
to
spend
appropriations or to retain or deduct
appropriations
for
whatever
reason.
Impoundment is actually prohibited by the GAA
unless there will be an unmanageable national
government budget deficit (which did not
happen). Nevertheless, theres no impoundment
in the case at bar because whats involved in the
DAP was the transfer of funds.
DAP
THE RULING
THE RULING
DAP
Those transfers of funds, which constituted crossborder augmentations for being from the
Executive to the COA and the House of
Representatives, are graphed as follows:
DAP
THE RULING
Other issues
THE RULING
DAP
THE RULING
DAP
a. Disaster Risk, Exposure, Assessment and
Mitigation
(DREAM)
project
under
the
Department of Science and Technology (DOST)
covered the amount of Pl.6 Billion;
b.
Aside from this transfer under the DAP to the
DREAM project exceeding by almost 3 00 the
appropriation by Congress for the program Generation of
new knowledge and technologies and research capability
building in priority areas identified as strategic to National
Development the Executive allotted funds for personnel
services and capital outlays. The Executive thereby
substituted its will to that of Congress;
THE RULING
DAP
c. Philippine Council for Industry, Energy and
Emerging Technology Research and Development
(DOST-PCIEETRD) for Establishment
Of the Advanced Failure Analysis Laboratory,
which the appropriation code and the particulars
-Research and Management Services -appearing in
the SARO did not correspond to the program
specified in the GAA.
DAP
THE RULING
Other issues
DAP
THE RULING
THE RULING
DAP
The requirement that revenue collections must
exceed revenue target should be understood to
mean that the revenue collections must exceed the
total of the revenue targets stated in the BESF.
Moreover, to release the unprogrammed funds
simply because there was an excess revenue as to
one source of revenue would be an unsound fiscal
management measure because it would disregard
the budget plan and foster budget deficits.
DAP
Other issues
THE RULING
THE RULING
DAP
The doctrine of operative fact recognizes the
existence of the law or executive act prior to the
determination of its unconstitutionality as an
operative fact that produced consequences that
cannot always be erased, ignored or disregarded.
In short, it nullifies the void law or executive act
but sustains its effects. It provides an exception to
the general rule that a void or unconstitutional law
produces no effect.
THE RULING
DAP
To declare the implementation of the DAP unconstitutional
without recognizing that its prior implementation
constituted an operative fact that produced consequences
in the real as well as juristic worlds of the Government and
the Nation is to be impractical and unfair. Unless the
doctrine is held to apply, the Executive as the disburser
and the offices under it and elsewhere as the recipients
could be required to undo everything that they had
implemented in good faith under the DAP. That scenario
would be enormously burdensome for the Government.
THE RULING
DAP
Equity alleviates such burden. The other side of the coin is
that it has been adequately shown as to be beyond debate
that the implementation of the DAP yielded undeniably
positive results that enhanced the economic welfare of the
country. To count the positive results may be impossible,
but the visible ones, like public infrastructure, could easily
include roads, bridges, homes for the homeless, hospitals,
classrooms and the like. Not to apply the doctrine of
operative fact to the DAP could literally cause the physical
undoing of such worthy results by destruction, and would
result in most undesirable wastefulness.
THE RULING
DAP
The doctrine of operative fact can apply only to the PAPs
that can no longer be undone, and whose beneficiaries
relied in good faith on the validity of the DAP, but cannot
apply to the authors, proponents and implementers of the
DAP, unless there are concrete findings of good faith in
their favor by the proper tribunals determining their
criminal, civil, administrative and other liabilities.
DAP
SUMMARY
DAP
END