Government asked to comment on 2025 budget blank items
MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has asked Congress and Malacañang to comment on the petition claiming unconstitutional irregularities in the enactment of the 2025 national budget, including the supposed blank items in the bicameral conference committee report of the spending plan.
The SC gave the respondents, the House of Representatives, Senate and Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin, 10 days to comment on the petition for certiorari and prohibition filed by former executive secretary Vic Rodriguez and Davao City 3rd District Rep. Isidro Ungab, among others.
According to the petitioners, the legislative and executive branches violated Article VI, Section 27 of the Constitution, which mandates that no public funds can be allocated without an appropriation made by law, when the bicameral panel submitted a report with blank items.
The bicameral report is the reconciled version of the House and Senate’s respective budget bills, which becomes the general appropriations bill that turns into the General Appropriations Act (GAA) once signed by President Marcos.
The petitioners claimed members of the bicameral conference committee left blanks in its report pertaining to budget allocations for the National Irrigation Administration, Department of Agriculture and the Philippine Coconut Authority.
These blanks, they said, are “very dubious and dangerous as the budgets for the said offices and programs remain to be undetermined.”
The petitioners said that while the bicam panel has the power to reconcile conflicting provisions in the Senate and the House versions of the 2025 general appropriations bill, “it is prohibited from amending provisions without clearly stating the version to which it should be amended to. Such irregularity is a blatant violation of the Constitution which should not be condoned.”
The identified items, however, all had appropriated amounts under the 2025 GAA signed by Marcos, a copy of which is available on the Department of Budget and Management website.
The petitioners also claimed the 2025 budget law violated Article XIV, Section 5(5) of the 1987 Constitution for not giving the education sector the highest budget allocation, as the