2nd case filed with SC vs constitutionality of allocation, release, disbursement of ‘confidential funds’

Another petition was filed with the Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday, Nov. 15, challenging the constitutionality of the allocation, release and disbursement of confidential funds to government departments and agencies.

The new petition also challenged the legality of the 2016 Executive Order No. 2 and Joint Circular 2015-01 which exempt the confidential funds from the people’s right of access to information.

The new petitioners were led by retired SC Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, former senator Richard J. Gordon, lawyer Howard M. Calleja, and several members of the 1975 Law Class of the University of the Philippines.

Aside from Vice President Sara Z. Duterte, named respondents in the new petition were Executive Secretary Lucas P. Bersamin, the Senate led by President Juan Miguel Zubiri, the House of Representatives led by Speaker Martin G. Romualdez, officials of the Department of Education, Department of Budget and Management, Department of the Interior and Local Government, and others.

The first petition against the constitutionality of the confidential funds was filed last Nov. 7 by a group led by Christian S. Monsod, Ibarra M. Gutierrez III, Maria Cielo D. Magno, Imelda M. Nicolas, Katrina C. Monsod, Ray Paolo J. Santiago, Honorio A. Poblador III, Augusto C. Lagman, Vicente C. Romano III, Rex C. Drilon II, and Miguel V. Jugo.

They asked the SC, not only to declare confidential funds unconstitutional, but also to compel the Office of the Vice President (OVP) to return to the government’s treasury the P125 million confidential funds which the OVP reportedly spent in just 11 days last December.

The new petitioners asked the SC to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) that would stop the enforcement of Joint Circular 2015-01, which laid down the guidelines and the reportorial requirements on confidential and intelligence funds, and Executive Order No. 2 issued in 2016 on Operationalizing in the Executive Branch the People's Constitutional Right to Information and the State Policies to Full Public Disclosure and  Transparency in the Public Service…),  which exempts confidential funds from people’s right of access to information.      

They asked the SC to compel the OVP, the Senate, the House of Representatives, and the Commission on Audit to furnish them with the report of expenses and liquidation of VP Duterte’s 2022 confidential funds in compliance with the “Full Public Disclosure” requirements and the “People’s Right to Information on Matters of Public Concern” under the Constitution.    

They told the SC that EO No. 2 and the Joint Circular 2015-01 are violative of Section 28, Article II of the 1987 Constitution which provides that “subject to reasonable conditions prescribed by law, the State adopts and implements a policy of full disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest.”    

They also told the SC that they were not provided, despite their requests, with copies of the official record, document, and/or paper related to disbursements and liquidation of the confidential funds since 2022.    

They said: “There is no reason for respondents to deny petitioners of their requested documents pertaining to the Confidential Funds because at present, there is no law that exempts full public disclosure of all government transactions that involve taxpayers’ money. Hence, the general rule of public disclosure must apply.”

They also said: “All government transactions involving confidential funds are official, government acts that require public disclosure. The funds are public in nature as they are taxes of the people, thus, must be spent only for public purpose.”

They pointed out that at present, there is no law that exempts full public disclosure and the people’s right to have access to information, official records, public records and to documents and papers pertaining to the confidential funds.    

Thus, they said, the refusal of the respondents to disclose the nature and purpose of the CIF funds to the public is a "step backward" in transparency and good governance.    

"It also sows distrust and further widens the division between the public and public offices. The country is being divided because government officials do not live by the principle that a public office is a public trust," they said.    

At the same time, the petitioners said the guidelines in the disbursement and liquidation of confidential funds “are unconstitutional as they are a usurpation of legislative power by the Executive Branch, as there is no valid delegation of legislative power.”

"The present disbursement and implementation of the confidential and intelligence funds runs contrary to transparent and honest governance," they said.

"This Honorable Court, in exercising its expanded power of judicial review, must protect the taxes of the people against capricious and whimsical spending of several organs of the state thus, requiring respondents to disclose to the public the purpose for which the confidential funds -- which are people's money -- have been spent," they also said.