Senate chief hits Noy’s impounding of P2B judiciary funds

President Aquino’s fiscal managers’ move to effectively impound more than P2 billion funds of the judiciary as a result of unfilled positions in the proposed 2012 national budget is seen to put the Executive in a clash, not only with the Judicial branch but also with the Legislature due to its apparent unconstitutionality.

No less than the upper chamber leader Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile yesterday warned his colleagues on approving the provision in the proposed national budget as this was unwarranted, saying that he will contest the move even if it would cost him his position.

“We operate on the principle of separation of powers. We are equal, independent and coordinate. None should control the other,” he said.

“As far as I’m concerned and I’m not binding the Senate, the way I see this is it’s a system of control. That’s unwarranted. As far as I’m concerned, personally, I will resist this. Nothing personal but it is my duty as head of the Senate to resist this system. I don’t care whether I will be kicked out of my position,” Enrile said during the deliberation of the proposed P13.675-billion budget of the judiciary for next year, excluding the P2.02 billion for unfilled positions which has been placed under the miscellaneous personnel benefits fund (MPBF).

The transfer the funds to MPBF which will be under the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), brought down the judiciary’s share in the national budget in 2012 as current year’s allocation stood at P14.2 billion.

Enrile shared the contention of the judiciary, through its representative-officials who were present at the hearing by the Senate finance committee, that the provision is seen as an apparent violation of the fiscal autonomy guaranteed under the Constitution to constitutional agencies.

Supreme Court Administrator Midas Marquez, said to Enrile during the hearing

that the commitment given to them by the DBM is that the MPDF of the judiciary will be released unconditionally, he told reporters though that such “arrangement” made by the Aquino administration is indeed seen as a violation of separation of powers, fiscal autonomy and non-reduction of the judiciary’s budget from the previous year.

Marquez said that while they are submitting to the wisdom of lawmakers since it’s Congress that allocates funds in accordance with the Constitution, they are not about to let this come to pass since it’s violative of the three issues he had mentioned.

Enrile said the legislature, specifically the Senate could be effected by the policy set by the DBM in withholding funds for unfilled positions, adding that it leaves much room for discretion to Budget Sec. Florencio Abad.

“I address this problem to the chairman of the finance committee. You have to work this out with the DBM because it also involves Congress, the Senate as well. Our unfilled positions are being sequestered by the Executive,” Enrile added.

The matter was first raised by Sen. Joker Arroyo some two weeks ago and even denounced as “fascistic and evil” as it’s a shift from the current policy where budget for unfilled positions of independent constitution agencies such as the SC, Commission on Elections (Comelec), Civil Service Commission (CSC), Commission on Audit (CoA), Ombudsman and even Congress will be practically transformed into a pork barrel of sort of the Executive.

Enrile also took note of this during the said hearing presided by Sen. Franklin Drilon, emphasizing that the constitution is clear that the “judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy.”

“Appropriations for the judiciary may not be reduced — there can be no better language on that — by the legislature below the anount appropriated for the previous year and after approval, shall be automatically and regularly released.

“When the Executive impounds it in the manner they are doing, the automatic release of this is no longer existent. But then, it depends upon the discretion of the secretary of budget and management,” he said.

“At the end of the year, if the MPBF is not used, then it becomes savings. But whose savings will it be? Savings of the SC? Savings of Congress or savings of the Executive? This is going to be a huge pork barrel. I will support Malacanang on various issues but I think Congress will have to put its foot down on the impoundment of these function. It is congress that decides the allocation of funds. The Executive proposes, but Congress will dispose it. We have to follow the constitution,” the Senate president warned.

Arroyo echoed the concern of the Senate leader on the said issue, pointing out to colleagues the need to be cautious in endording for approval the said provision.

“We don’t want a case (on this) in the future,” Arroyo said.

Responding to Enrile, Drilon said they recognize that this is a problem area which requires discussion between the legislature and the judiciary at this point.

Yet, Drilon defended the Executive saying that the matter of disposition of MPBF is not under the control of another branch of government.

“I am reacting to the question of Arroyo becayse we have to sit in a biecameral confenrecen (committee) when we finish the budget. I was just saying that I do not know how the House of Representatives will take on this,” Drilon said.

In an interview with reporters after the hearing, Drilon said he had already suggested to the judiciary, in order to resolve the issue of MPBF, either wholly or partially, to fill up all the vacant positions so that there will be no issue of impounding as this will be automatically funded.

“We have asked the SC to organize the unorganized courts, authorized but are unorganized. At least 135 of these laws passed have not been implemented in terms of organizing the courts. We are glad that the court is receptive to the suggestions and agrees that indeed the disposition rate can stand improvement. They will submit to the committee an action plan on how to have a faster rate of disposition. We cannot impose deadlines on the courts, we can only submit this for their consideration,” Drilon said.

Drilon also contested Enrile’s assertion on the said funds being transformed as a pork barrel of the Executive.

“If you say that this is a pork barrel, then if you release it and it is unused, it is also the pork barrel of the judiciary. It takes two to tango. In other words, if we assert that this becomes the pork barrel of the executive, if it is released and it is unused, then it is also the pork barrel of the judiciary. I will not agree with that proposition.

“We respect the position of the Senate President. We will take that position to the bicam. We will argue, if that is the position carried by the Senate. We will see what happens,” he said.

“If it is released, it is disposed of by the SC. If it’s not released, it helps in alleviating the deficit. The Executive cannot use that because that fund is for the judiciary. So if it is not released, assuming that the position of the DBM prevails, then at the end of the year, whatever is the amount that is not released because the positions are unfilled, will correspondingly reduce the deficit… I am not passing judgment here on the legality or constitutionality of this provision. I’m just stating what are the realities that we face here.

“The position of the DBM is that it is nto unconstitutional because according to them, this is part of the judiciary budget, automatically released to the agencies concerned,” he added.

Earlier, House Deputy Speaker Jesus Crispin Remulla also denounced the Executive’s scheme to hold on to the funds for unfilled posts in the judiciary and other agencies which, Remulla warned, would enable the DBM “to seize control of the hiring budget.”

Remulla protested the move as “unconstitutional” adding it would “set a precedent for Malacañang to control the hiring budget of other constitutional bodies, including Congress.” –Angie M. Rosales, Daily Tribune