The Supreme Court yesterday declared as unconstitutional the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) and the use of Malampaya funds for other purposes other than energy-related projects.
Voting 14-0, the high court nullified “all legal provisions of past and present congressional pork barrel laws,” which authorized lawmakers, either individually or in committees, to intervene, assume or participate in any of the various post-enactment stages of the budget execution.”
Despite the ruling, Rep. Joseph “Ace” Durano of Cebu’s 5th district said he can still implement projects and programs for his district without the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF).
He added that the executive and legislative departments should move forward despite the Supreme Court ruling.
The High Tribunal also said provisions of the laws allowing the President to use the Malampaya funds for purposes other than energy related projects and the provision that allows use of the Presidential Social Fund for priority infrastructure development projects were unconstitutional.
The court said Presidential Decree 910 Section 8 and Presidential Decree 1993 regarding the Presidential Development Fund, failed on the sufficient standard test.
The sufficient standard test mandates “adequate guidelines or limitations in the law to determine the boundaries of the delegate’s authority and prevent the delegation from running riot”.
“The disbursement/release of the Malampaya funds under the phrase ‘and for such other purposes as may hereafter be directed by the President pursuant to Section 8 of PD 910 are hereby enjoined,” the high court said.
“Said funds covered by this permanent injunction shall not be disbursed/released but instead returned to the general coffers of the government, except for funds covered by the Malampaya funds and the Presidential Social Fund,” the high court said.
The high court also nullified the laws that provided lawmakers lump-sum allocations to fund their chosen projects.
“All informal practices of similar import and effect, which the Court similarly deems to be acts of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of discretion,” are also declared void.
“(Thus) the Court’s temporary injunction dated Sept. 10, 2013 is hereby declared to be permanent. Thus, the disbursement/release of the remaining PDAF funds allocated for the year 2013, as well as for all previous years are hereby enjoined,” the high court said.
The high court ordered the Department of Justice and the Office of the Ombudsman to investigate and file charges against all government officials and private individuals involved in the improper disbursement of PDAF.
Among those who separately petitioned the court to scrap the PDAF system were losing senatorial candidates Samson Alcantara and Greco Belgica.
Still, Durano said he believed that his district’s needs like scholarships and health services can be addressed “by availing of “programs of the various departments or agencies of the national government.”
With the SC ruling, Durano said the Executive and Legislative departments should work together to find “fair and equitable allocations” of the national budget that satisfies the conditions set by the Supreme Court.
“The demand for an equitable and inclusive national budget is still relevant despite the declaration of the practiced CDF/PDAF system as unconstitutional,” Durano said.