By Erika Mae P. Sinaking, Reporter and Francessca S. Abalos
THE Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) advised the Marcos administration to temporarily hold off on releasing allocations under the 2026 budget covered by the Supreme Court (SC) ruling, while it prepares to challenge restrictions on unprogrammed funds.
At a Palace briefing on Thursday, Solicitor General Darlene Marie B. Berberabe said the OSG is seeking to clarify boundary lines between judicial oversight and executive authority in a motion for reconsideration set to be submitted to the High Court by Nov. 4.
She said the legal challenge centers on the execution of the 2026 national budget following a Supreme Court en banc ruling that declared certain unprogrammed appropriation provisions in previous budgets unconstitutional.
“On our part, what we will advise the DBM (Department of Budget and Management) and the Executive is to take a position to hold off for now, since it is expected that this will be decided soon,” she said, noting the Executive’s attempt to keep the impact on the 2026 budget “minimal and not that significant.”
“What are clearly covered by the decision, hold off for now, as a matter of good faith and because we do not want to non-comply,” she added.
She did not specify which exact funds or programs would be held back, noting that the OSG and the DBM are scheduled to meet next week to determine the affected line items.
The High Court ruled that congressional increases to unprogrammed appropriations and special funds in previous national budgets exceeded constitutional limits, including a P449.5-billion increase in 2024 and a P17.99-billion addition in 2025.
While the Supreme Court affirmed that unprogrammed funds are not unconstitutional per se, it established strict guardrails barring lump-sum allocations and enforcing a constitutional budget ceiling.
The ruling applied the doctrine of operative fact to protect completed expenditures in previous fiscal years but permanently prohibited the Executive from implementing specific unprogrammed special provisions in the 2026 budget.
Ms. Berberabe said that the Supreme Court decision is not yet final, noting that filing an appeal allows the administration to seek legal clarifications.
The wisdom behind filing the motion, she explained, lies in ensuring that vital public services and project execution under the 2026 budget are not needlessly paralyzed while the OSG seeks guidance on spending guardrails.
Reiterating the administration’s position, Ms. Berberabe said that the OSG’s motion seeks to uphold the constitutional separation of powers, arguing that budget preparation, allocation, and execution are explicitly assigned to the political branches — the Executive and Congress.
“As for 2026 [budget], because [the decision] just came out and it is not yet final, there is no problem there. I think there are more questions regarding 2024 and 2025, because the finding [in] 2026 had the least impact,” she said.
“So, we are just ensuring that the impact on the execution of projects until December won’t be that significant,” she said.
UNLIKELY REVERSAL
Michael Henry Ll. Yusingco, a senior research fellow at the Ateneo Policy Center, described the filing of a motion for reconsideration as “almost always perfunctory” and “more likely just a matter of course.”
“The losing party will always disagree with the decision, and an MR is a due process mechanism afforded to him to articulate those disagreements,” Mr. Yusingco told BusinessWorld in a Facebook chat. He said that there is likely no expectation that the decision will be overturned or altered.
He pointed out that for the verdict to truly impact future fiscal governance, “the decision must be brought down to the community level” through media explainers and public discussions.
“Voters and taxpayers must use this decision to pressure lawmakers not to raid the public coffers during budget deliberations,” Mr. Yusingco said, adding that public oversight is only effective if citizens fully comprehend the ruling.
Meanwhile, the DBM and the Senate on Thursday discussed how to adjust increased allocations and unprogrammed appropriations in the House-approved 2027 budget.
At a Senate hearing, Budget Secretary Kim Robert C. de Leon told senators they can still raise budgets for programs, projects and agencies as long as they do not exceed the President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr.’s proposal for programmed and unprogrammed appropriations. However, he said the ruling still needs to be clarified.
Senate President Sherwin T. Gatchalian and Senator Joseph Victor G. Ejercito, who chairs the Senate Committee on Finance, sought clarification from the DBM on how to apply these rulings to the Senate version of the 2027 budget. He noted the urgency of determining how to apply the SC ruling as committee-level budget deliberations are nearing completion.
Based on the DBM’s interpretation, the ruling on the 2024 and 2025 budget merely prohibits increasing the ceiling or totality of the expenditure program, Mr. de Leon said, citing the 2001 case of Sarmiento v. Treasurer of the Philippines.
Both Mr. Gatchalian and Mr. De Leon acknowledged that the provisions were vital for foreign-assisted projects (FAPS), with a majority of their budget coming from standby funds.
Mr. De Leon also confirmed that the 2027 budget no longer includes the Strengthening Assistance for Government Infrastructure and Social Programs (SAGIP), which the SC declared unconstitutional. The budget also listed fewer items under unprogrammed appropriations.
He assured the senators that the DBM was ready to provide Congress with detailed breakdowns of FAP allocations and receive additional safeguards to guide the release of unprogrammed funds.
Makabayan bloc lawmakers, meanwhile, urged the House of Representatives to recall the House-approved 2027 General Appropriations Bill.
Mr. Ejercito, however, appealed to the chamber not to recall the 2027 budget as this could delay the budget further. “If that happens, in my opinion, there is a large chance… that we will not be able to pass the budget by year-end,” he added.
The finance chair said several events may impact the timeline, namely the 2027 Association of Southeast Asian Nations Summit and the resumption of Vice-President Sara Duterte-Caprio’s impeachment trial.
He stressed that disagreements on budget allocations and the provisions that violate the SC ruling can be adjusted during the bicameral conference, which will be transparent and televised.