You are on page 1of 4

Guingona vs. Carague PETITIONERS: Teofisto Guingona, Jr. and Aquilino Pimentel, Jr.

, members of the Senate RESPONDENTS: Guillermo Carague, Secretary of Dept. of Budget and Management; Rozalina Cajucom, National Treasurer; and Commission on Audit FACTS: The 1990 budget totals P233.5B It consists of 1. P155.3B appropriated by Congress under RA6831 (General Appropriations Act of 1990 or GAA 1990), of which 27B will go to DECS, the highest among all departments; and 2.P98.4B in automatic appropriations (P86B for debt servicing) pursuant to: a. PD81 (which amends RA4860, Foreign Borrowing Act), b.PD1177 (entitled “Revising the Budget Process in Order to Institutionalize the Budgetary Innovations of the New Society), and c.PD1967 (“An Act Strengthening the Guarantee and Payment Positions of the Rep. of the Phil. On Its Contingent Liabilities Arising out of Relent and Guaranteed Loans by Appropriating Funds for the Purpose”) Petitioners, are seeking: 1. the declaration of the unconstitutionality of Presidential Decree Nos. 81, 1177 (Section 31) and 1967; and 2. the restraining of the disbursement for the debt service under the 1990 budget under said decrees (i.e. the P86B automatic appropriations). They are basing their petition on 3 grounds: 1.By appropriating more funds for debt servicing (P86B) than for education (P27B), such appropriations are violative of Section 5, Article 14 of the Constitution. 2. PDs 81, 1177 and 1967 are no longer operative under the present Constitution (1987) 3.Such PDs violate Section 29(1), Article 6 of the Constitution, which states that “no money shall be paid out of the National Treasury except in pursuance to an appropriation made by law.” P ROCEDURAL I SSUES: 1.Locus Standi – as Senators, they may raise the issue of unconstitutionality − as taxpayers, they have personal interest in restraining unlawful expenditure of public funds 2.Justiciability – in Gonzales vs. Macaraig, Jr., which involves the constitutionality of the presidential veto of certain provisions of GAA 1990, the Court held that the

PD 81 amends RA 4860. the very survival of our economy II. Article 18 of the Constitution recognizes that all existing decrees not inconsistent with the Constitution shall remain operative under amended. Article 14 of the Constitution and. repealed or revoked. and that the charge being controverted. Implied repeal and revocation is frowned upon. The fact the DECS appropriation is the highest budgetary appropriation among all department budgets is a clear and sufficient compliance with the constitutional mandate according highest priority to education. this does not mean that Congress is so hamstrung that it is deprived of the power to respond to the imperatives of national interest and for the attainment of other state policies or objectives. − With the Senate maintaining that the President’s veto is unconstitutional. principal and interests on public debt PD1967 provides that “there is hereby appropriated. Congress is certainly not without any power. which authorizes the president to obtain foreign loans and credits and appropriates the necessary funds therefore. NO. there is an actual case or justiciable controversy between the Upper House of Congress and the Executive that may be taken cognizance of by the SC ISSUES: I. such amounts as may be necessary to effect payments on foreign or domestic loans Their purpose is to enable the government to make prompt payment and/or advances for all loans to protect and maintain the credit standing of the country . inter alia. The Constitution mandates the assignment of highest budgetary priority to education in order to insure that teaching will attract and retain its rightful share of the best available talents through adequate remuneration and other means of job satisfaction and fulfillment However. PD1177 and PD1967 are still operative under the Constitution. W/N the P86B debt servicing appropriation is violative of Section 5. to provide an appropriation that can reasonably service our enormous debt It is a matter of: 1. YES. invalid. Section 3.political doctrine interposes no obstacle to the judicial determination of rival claims under the Constitution. therefore. W/N PD81. by providing that funds are hereby appropriated from the National Treasury to cover any deficiency for debt servicing PD1177 provides for the automatic appropriations for expenditures for. guided only by its good judgment. protecting our credit standing 3. honor 2. out of any funds in the National Treasury.

Although the decrees do not state specific amounts to be paid. If the delegation of the authority to execute the legislative intent satisfies the test of completeness.Petitioners allege that said decrees became functus officio when Pres.” The SC found that. the legislative power was restored to Congress and that new legislation for automatic appropriations must come from Congress. with the expiration of the one-man legislature. necessitated by the very nature of the problem being addressed. the SC said that “to avoid the taint of unlawful delegation. The SC held that it could not have been the intention of the framers of the Constitution to require all existing laws to pass through Congress again The requirement of Sections 24 and 27. credits or indebtedness… No uncertainty arises in executive implementation as the limit will be the exact amounts as shown by the books of the Treasury . the questioned laws are complete in all their essential terms and conditions and sufficient standards are indicated therein. who is to do it. The legislature does not abdicate its function when it describes what job must be done. In Edu vs. Article 6 of the Constitution or W/N under the said PDs there is undue delegation of legislative power NO. interest. applies only to bills that are still to be passed by Congress This is all the more true because of the “political wisdom” of automatic appropriations. and other normal banking charges on the loans. which is to provide flexibility to the government for effective execution of debt management policies. which requires appropriations and bills to originate from the House of Representatives and be approved by the President. at the very least. then there is a valid delegation. there must be a standard that implies. W/N they are unconstitutional by violating Sections 24 and 29(1). the amounts nevertheless are made certain by the legislative parameters provided in the decrees The Executive is not of unlimited discretion as to the amounts to be disbursed The mandate is only to pay the principal. Marcos was ousted because. and what is the scope of his authority. in this case. III. Ericta. that the legislature itself determines matters of principle and lays down fundamental policy… the standard may be either express or implied from the policy and purpose. taxes.

Section 29(1). Article 6 merely states that appropriation should be made by law It does not provide or prescribe any particular form of words or religious recitals in which authorization or appropriation by Congress shall be made. it made appropriations by law . except that it be done “by law” This is precisely what the decrees did.