ABS-CBN News

PDAF is alive and well

Posted at

Oo, Juana, kailangan mo pa ding lumuhod kay Kong.

Nang nilabas ng Korte Suprema ang desisyon na nagsasabing unconstitutional ang Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), sinabi ng gobyerno ni Pangulong Benigno Simeon Aquino III na patay na ang pork.

Sinabi din kasi ng Korte Suprema na PERMANENTE ang desisyon. Ang hindi pa nagagastos na PDAF ay dapat bumalik sa pangkalahatang pondo ng bayan.

Kahit nitong Hulyo lang, inulit ng mga kaalyado ni Pangulong Aquino na patay na ang pork barrel, kaya di na daw kailangan ng isang batas mula sa taumbayan — o People’s Initiative.

Ito ang sinabi ni Senate President Franklin Drilon:

“There’s no necessity for it. The SC has declared it unconstitutional and thus the PDAF (Priority Development Assistance Fund) cannot be restored in the 2015 or future budgets and the Senate has deleted it in 2014.”

Pero itong transcript ng isang miting sa pagitan ni Health Undersecretary Garin (dating mambabatas) at mga myembro ng Kongreso, ay nagpapakita lamang na hindi sumunod ang gobyerno sa utos ng Korte Suprema. Tatalakayin ko ito pagkatapos malahad ang desisyon ng SC.

Bakit nga ba pinagbawal ng SC ang PDAF? Sinabi nito na:

- May kapangyarihan ang mga mambabatas na pumasa ng budget pero di na dapat sumawsaw pa sa kung saan ito mapunta pagkatapos ng pag-pasa ng batas.
- Ang Executive Department na ang dapat na mag-patupad ng budget.
- Hindi pwedeng makialam ang mga taga-Kongreso kung sino ang makakakuha ng pondo, proyekto or programa, dahil dapat nakasaad na ito sa budget.

Heto ang desisyon ng SC:

“In view of the constitutional violations discussed in this Decision, the Court hereby declares as UNCONSTITUTIONAL: (a) the entire 2013 PDAF Article; (b) all legal provisions of past and present Congressional Pork Barrel Laws, such as the previous PDAF and CDF Articles and the various Congressional Insertions, which authorize/d legislators—whether individually or collectively organized into committees—to intervene, assume or participate in any of the various post-enactment stages of the budget execution, such as but not limited to the areas of project identification, modification and revision of project identification, fund release and/or fund realignment, unrelated to the power of congressional oversight; (c) all legal provisions of past and present Congressional Pork Barrel laws, such as the previous PDAF and CDF Articles and the various Congressional Insertions, which confer/red personal, lump-sum allocations to legislators from which they are able to fund specific projects which they themselves determine; (d) 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; and (e) the phrases (1) “and for such other purposes as may be hereafter directed by the President” under Section 8 of Presidential Decree No. 910 and (2) “to finance the priority infrastructure development projects” under Section 12 of PD 1869, as amended by PD 1993, for both failing the sufficient standard test in violation of the principle of non-delegability of legislative power.”

Noon, sinabi ni Budget Secretary Abad sa mga grupong kontra-pork na dapat matigil ang poder ng Kongreso na maghimasok sa pag-gamit ng pondo pagnapasa ang batas.

Alam natin na hindi nila tinupad ito kasi namudmod din sila nga pera sa mga mambabatas sa ilalim ng Disbursement Acceleration Fund (DAP).

Sa transcript ng miting nina Usec Garin at mga mambabatas, makikita ang totoong dahilan kung bakit kapit tuko sa PDAF ang mga pulitiko.

Disclaimer: The views in this blog are those of the blogger and do not necessarily reflect the views of ABS-CBN Corp.