Senate President Pro Tempore Panfilo “Ping” Lacson defended the necessity of Unprogrammed Appropriations under the Special Purpose Fund in the national budget saying these are constitutional and even necessary.

But Lacson said use of the Unprogrammed Appropriations however, should strictly follow safeguards or three special provisions under the General Appropriations Act (GAA).

The senator pointed this out a day after Supreme Court Justice Ramon Paul Hernando said the practice of integrating unprogrammed appropriations in the GAA is unconstitutional and even "repugnant."

“With all due respect to Justice Hernando, 'Unprogrammed Appropriations' under the Special Purpose Fund is necessary to augment certain items under the Regular Budget as long as the same strictly complies with the three Special Provisions under the GAA, namely: (a) there is an excess non-tax revenue collection; (b) there is an accompanying or new revenue measure and; (c) approved loans,” Lacson said.

“Further, only the President may approve such augmentation due to some justifiable reasons in order to fully implement specific programs, activities and projects (PAPs) clearly identified therein,” he added.

The senator lamented that what made the Unprogrammed Appropriations controversial and legally infirm under the 2024 GAA were the two additional special provisions inserted during the bicameral conference committee hearings, 

“These additional special provisions included government-owned and controlled corporations such as the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth) and foreign-assisted projects,” he pointed out.

Lacson assured however, that both items have been addressed in the Senate version of the 2026 budget bill, with the provision on GOCCs excluded.