House panel restores P300-million judiciary budget

MANILA, Philippines - The House appropriations committee restored yesterday the P300 million that had been “unconstitutionally” removed by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) from the downgraded P12.9-billion budget of the judiciary for 2010.

Opposition Rep. Rufus Rodriguez of Cagayan de Oro moved for the restoration of the amount for the Supreme Court, after Court Administrator Jose Perez complained about the DBM’s decision to reduce their 2010 budget, which was already P13.2 billion for this year.

“This is an unconstitutional reduction of the budget. The (1987) Constitution says the budget of last year cannot be decreased for the present year,” Perez informed the appropriations committee chaired by Quirino Rep. Junie Cua.

“We’re asking that at the very least, they restore our budget to the 2009 level and increase it with the amount corresponding with the salary increase for personnel services,” Perez appealed to the committee members.

Perez cited Article 8, Section 3 of the Constitution, which gives fiscal autonomy to the judicial department.

The Constitution also provides that “appropriations for the judiciary may not be reduced by the legislature below the amount appropriated for the previous year and, after approval, shall be automatically and regularly released.”

“We will not allow this desecration of the Constitution by the DBM. I will make a motion to restore their budget in consideration of the outstanding performance of the SC,” Rodriguez said. House Deputy Majority Leader Jesus Crispin Remulla seconded his motion.

Rep. Pedro Romualdo of Camiguin, who heads the House committee on good government, also said it was unconstitutional for the DBM to reduce the budget not only of the judiciary but of any agency or department for that matter.

“The DBM should have been told that it may disregard the request of increasing the budget, but it cannot reduce the budget of a commission as reflected in the previous budget because that is a very clear constitutional provision,” he pointed out.

Alagad party-list Rep. Rodante Marcoleta said Congress should restore the cuts made by the executive department on the judiciary’s budget “as a matter of simple courtesy to another branch of government.”

Perez complained that the DBM removed the budget for the judiciary’s capital outlay, particularly for the purchase of new equipment. The proposed budget also did not include salary for some positions that have been filled.

He explained to the Cua panel that the slight increase in the budget of the Supreme Court in the proposed budget corresponded to the mandatory 10 percent increase in salaries of its personnel.