DISBURSEMENT ACCELARATION

PROGRAM AND ITS CONSTITUTIONALITY

A Research Paper

Maeriam S. Uckung

Table of Contents
I.
II.
III.
IV.

V.

Introduction
Controversies and Issues
DAPs Constitutionality
DAPs Unconsitutionality
a. Appropriation should be left to the Legislative
b. Realignment of funds is allowed not creation of new project
c. Lack of practical use
Conclusion

DISBURSEMENT ACCELARATION PROGRAM AND ITS CONSTITUTIONALITY

MAERIAM S. UCKUNG
Introduction
People become more attentive once they have been disturbed by an issue that affects their daily
lives. As for Filipinos and the Philippine media, it is not only being attentive that should be done,
it should be coupled with the desire to change the system which continously give massive
economic prejudice and damage to the citizens of the country.
In the height of the current issue involving Janet Lim-Napoles, certain legislators and the
Pork Barrel, one particular disbursement project of the government had a share of the spotlight,
this is what they call the Disbursement Accelaration Program or simply DAP.
The Disbursement Accelaration Program is one of the innovations of the Aquino
administration. The program was approved on October 12, 2011 by President Aquino after the
recommendation of the Development Budget Coordination Committee or DBCC and certain
members of the cabinet of the president.
This DAP is conceptualized as a stimulus package under the Aquino administration
designed to fast-track public spending and push economic growth. Based on the press release of
the Deparment of Budget and Management1, the DAP would fund projects that are fastdisbursing. These projects includes public works, agriculture and agrarian reform, support to
1Official Gazette, Aquino government pursues 72.11B disbursement acceleration
fundhttp://www.gov.ph/2011/10/12/aquino-goverment-pursues-p72-11-bdisbursement-acceleration-plan/, retrieved November 10, 2011

Local Government Units, housing, relocation and resettlement, railway rehabilitation, peace
development and weather forecasting.
The funds used in DAP, according to the Department of Budget and Management 2, were
sourced from savings generated by the government, the realignment of which is subject to the
approval of the President; as well as the Unprogrammed Fund that can be tapped when
government has windfall revenue collections, e.g., unexpected remittance of dividends from the
GOCCs and Government Financial Institutions (GFIs), sale of government assets.
The funds in the DAP amounted to P72.11 billion. Of the P72.11 billion, P37.92 billion
will be released to national government agencies; P7.25-billion to LGUs; and P26.90 billion to
government-owned or -controlled corporations (GOCCs).3 These were the amounts invested and
disbursed by the government through the Disbursement Acceleration Program.
Controversies and Issues
Back in 2011, there were no extravagant media and public attention to the Disbursement
Acceleration Program. It was considered as one of the normal disbursements of the government
during the said year. However, this year, 2013, due to the uprise of the Pork Barrel Scam,
every disbursement of the government has been under the radar of the media and the public.
In the middle of October this year, various media institutions released articles regarding the
Disbursement Acceleration Program. These articles were trying to associate the DAP with the
2 Department of Budget and Management, http://www.dbm.gov.ph/?page_id=7364
retrieved November 10, 2011,
3 Official Gazette, Aquino government pursues 72.11B disbursement acceleration
fundhttp://www.gov.ph/2011/10/12/aquino-goverment-pursues-p72-11-bdisbursement-acceleration-plan/, retrieved November 10, 2011

issue on the Priority Development Assurance Fund or commonly known as the pork barrel. Some
would say that this is a way to associate the executive, particularly the president, to a case that
has been haunting the legislators for the previous months.
Allegedly, the funds of the DAP were misappropriated and were never used properly by
the executive. In recent articles by the media, it has been said that around a third of the total
funds were channelled to off-budget items.4 The huge amounts were spent on items and projects
that cannot be found in the 2011 or 2012 General Appropriations Act of the Congress. Some of
the items that were highly questionable includes purchases of additional trains for th MRT,
budget for the Moro National Liberation Front and the Cordillera Peoples Liberation Army for
the Pamana program and stimulus funds for the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.5
It is Constitutional
After days of being pressured by media, the government responded to the allegations of that the
Disbursement Acceleration Fund by firmly stating that it is constitutional and that the executive,
through the president, can appropriate the savings for projects that were stated in the said
program funds.
Particularly, the government raises many provisions of law that bring about to the
constitutionality of the Disbursement Acceleration Funds. Spearheading the argument of the
government is Paragraph 5 Section 25, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.
Paragraph 5 Section 25, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution provides that:
4 Inquirer http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/521823/13-of-dap-went-to-off-budget-items.
Retrieved November 10, 2013
5 Ibid.

No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the

President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may,
by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for
their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective
appropriations.
Simply, the said constitutional provision is stating that the president or the executive can
freely manipulate the savings of the government from the General Appropriations Act to any
projects necessary for the country. The provision uses the term augment which means that the
savings can be moved from one line item to another.
Also, another basis for the validity of the Disbursement Acceleration Fund is Executive
Order 292. Particularly the provisions on Section 49, Chapter 5, Book VI of the 1987
Administrative Code is used as support which provides:
Savings in the appropriations provided in the General Appropriations Act may be used
for the settlement of the following obligations incurred during a current fiscal year or
previous fiscal years as may be approved by the Secretary in accordance with rules and
procedures as may be approved by the President
The said law provides a set of items to which the government or the executive may use
any savings in the budget of the government. Particularly listed are obligations incurred during
the fiscal year that are for salaries and benefits of any employees of the government.
Last law used by the government to argue for its Constitutionality is the General
Provisions on the Use of Savings under RA 10147 which provides:

Sec. 59. Use of Savings. The President of the Philippines, the Senate President, the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the
Heads of Constitutional Commissions enjoying fiscal autonomy, and the Ombudsman are
hereby authorized to augment any item in this Act from savings in other items of their
respective appropriations.
Sec. 61. Priority in the Use of Savings. In the use of savings, priority shall be given to
the augmentation of the amounts set aside for compensation, year-end bonus and cash
gift, retirement gratuity, terminal leave benefits, old-age pension of veterans and other
personnel benefits authorized by law, and those expenditure items authorized in agency
special provisions, in Section 16 and in other sections of the General Provisions of this
Act.
The above-provision gives the notion that the president or any of the listed official may
freely manipulate the usage of any savings that can be realized in the General Appropriations
Act. This also highlights a grant of power to the President to use and appropriate funds of the
governement for projects.
DAP is Unconstitutional
Although the executive firmly held to the constitutionality of the Disbursement Acceleration
Funds, certain critics of the government and well-renowned political leaders expressed their
disappointment and views to the unconstitutionality of the said act of the president. These people

understands that although the intention of the Disbursement Acceleration Program is for the
development of the country, certain technicalities have given rise to it being unconstitutional.6
Particularly the major points that gives rise to the unconstitutionality of the Disbursement
Acceleration Program includes the deprivation of the power to appropriate the funds, which
should be left to the legislative, the usage of the funds for new projects and the funds should be
used for the budget in the following year.
The Power to Appropriate
-

The power to appropriate is granted to the Legislature

Any appropriations not done by the legislature is unconsitutional

Realignment not new projects

-

Savings should be approprortioned to items in the General Appropriations Act

Savings should be used to limited items as stated in the Administrative Code

Savings should be used for the next year

-

Without any need or emergenct to use the funds, the government should not have hurried

the spending of the savings

Savings shall be appropriated in the next year
More projects are in need of funds, not the new ones.

6 http%3a//www.abs-cbnnews.com/focus/10/02/13/diokno-bernas-dap-cant-fundnew-projects retrieved November 10, 2013.

Conclusion
The intention of the Disbursement Acceleration Program is quite simple. It is to inject fundings
to immediately improve the economy of the Philippines. The upside of the said program is that
not only is economy improved by the disbursement of the funds but the projects would lead to
improvement of the living conditions of the citizens of the country of the Philippines.
However, a review of how it is done and implemented gives the people more questions
than answers. It is unclear how there is supposed to be an improvement in the lives of people
through the spendings done through the Disbursement Acceleration Program. It is also vague
how people would benefit from billions spent on projects that cater to specific groups of people
only.
Although it is not yet sure whether the Disbursement Acceleration Program is a method
of corruption or an intellectual form to launder money of the government, the people would like
this program to be set in a straight line.
Clearly, the people are tired of news of corruption. The people have grown old and weary
of the never-ending tales of how a rich and powerful politician grabbed the money of the people
and used it as his own. The people wants a government that can stand for the rights of the people
and, instead of being run by greed, be one that supports the nation for its upliftment.
The Disbursment Accelleration Program is clearly unconstitutional. It does not reflect the
ideals that are projected to the people by the 1987 Philippine Constitution. It is one of the
Executive Orders that have been understudied and have been misapplied by the current
administration.

The power to appropriate shall be left solely to the legistature. Although the said funds
were borne out of savings, it does not give authority to the president and the executive to use and
appropriate them. This violates the equality of power the is embodied in the 1987 Philippine
Consitution.
The act of the president of using the savings of the General Appropriations Act gives the
people the notion that the president has full authority in all that is happening in the country and
that the legislature is left with no choice but to follow. This perception violates the supposed to
be check and balance that should be happening.
This checks and balance is what the 1987 constitution is trying to embody. Without this,
we will end into another dictatorship. One that is similar to the dark years of the country when
one man, the president was controlling nearly everything.
It is not a bad thing to be thinking of the improvement of the economy and society. It is
not also bad to invest money to achieve this goal. However, the manner of investing is the one
that should be considered and this has not be followed by the government.
As stated earlier, realignment, simply, is putting the funds into another project. This
project should be one that is already present and has already been budgetted. However, the
current fundings do not address this.
It is simply shown that the projects to which this funds were given were ones that are new
and do not actually have been appropriated in the General Appropriations Act. It is clear that
there was no realignment but a creation of new projects by the executive, which is not allowed
by th rules.

Clearly, the government have failed to follow the rules that they have given. The laws
should be followed by the people and most especially, the govenrment, to ensure order and peace
throughout society. Since the laws were not followed, the people have grown mad and that their
anger cannot be really sustained.
This issue is one that rose because of a whistleblower to the malfeasance of the members
of the legislative body through the funds of that were supposed to be given to the people. The
people have been distubed by the alleged thievery of the officials that they are studying the
actions of the rest of the members of the government.
The people have grown aware and have grown to be in intelect to the issues of
government spending. It is not enough that the government say that it is valid or bring laws that
say it is valid. They should let the people feel that it one that is valid and needed by the people of
the country.
In this case, there have been no showing of the importance and need for this spending. It
is unclear how this funds would help the society or help economy. It is a challenge for a
government to prove how this funds would uplift the depreciating conditions of the life the
citizens of the nation.
To end, let us cite the law that governs our country, the preamble of the 1987 Constitution
which states that:
We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a
just and humane society, and establish a Government that shall embody our ideals
and aspirations, promote the common good, conserve and develop our patrimony,
and secure to ourselves and our posterity, the blessings of independence and

democracy under the rule of law and a regime of truth, justice, freedom, love,
equality, and peace, do ordain and promulgate this Constitution.

The preamble, although not a source of right, gives us a vision of what the government of
the Philippines should be. In summary the government should be one that embodies the
following things. First, the embodiment of ideals of the people.
The ideal government is one for the people, by the people and to the people. Just like the
funds of the government, it should be for, by and to the people and not to the pockets of greedy
politicians.
Second, promotion of common good. Common good refers a blanket of improvement to
the society. Equality in equity or having and giving every person in the country what is due to
him. People should not be wealthy but others are starving because of them. The funds are not
inteded for the government and the government officials personal consumption but for the
consumption and the improvement of the people.
The third one is the rule of law. The government officials, the president, the members of
the congress and the judiciary are in the government for one thing, it is for enforcement of the
rule of law. This should be one that should be contemplated by the government. It is not about
the money or the wealth that should be the reason for them to be in office. It is about their
concern to give the people of the Philippines the equality and equity through enforcement of the
rule of law in every aspect of politics.

It is not enough that people be aware of the happenings of in the country. It is not enough
that the citizens listen and just argue of the concepts of corruption in their head and hearts. The
people should stand up for their rights and bring peace to themselves.
Corruption have been rampant through the years. There is no showing that its existence
would come to and end or if there would be a decline on ts impact. But one thing should be
erased. That is economic improvement should not be used as an escape route by the government
to be able to manipulate the funds of the country and use it for themselves.
As said by many political analyst, DAP, PDAF or pork barrel, whatever the name is, the
one thing that they have in common is corruption. If this is not errased, people will still continue
to express anger in the government. Therefore, it is only when corruption is gone that the people
will revert their trust to the government.