Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
ARTICLE II
Sec. 25. The State shall ensure the autonomy of local governments.
ARTICLE X
Sec. 2. The territorial and political subdivisions shall enjoy local autonomy.
Sec. 3. The Congress shall enact a local government code which shall provide for a
more responsive and accountable local government structure instituted through a
system of decentralization with effective mechanisms of recall, initiative, and
referendum, allocate among the different local government units their powers,
responsibilities, and resources, and provide for the qualifications, election,
appointment and removal, term, salaries, powers and functions and duties of local
officials, and all other matters relating to the organization and operation of the local
units.
Sec. 2. Declaration of Policy. (a) It is hereby declared the policy of the State that
the territorial and political subdivisions of the State shall enjoy genuine and
meaningful local autonomy to enable them to attain their fullest development as
self-reliant communities and make them more effective partners in the attainment
of national goals. Toward this end, the State shall provide for a more responsive and
accountable local government structure instituted through a system of
decentralization whereby local government units shall be given more powers,
authority, responsibilities, and resources. The process of decentralization shall
proceed from the National Government to the local government units.
(c) It is likewise the policy of the State to require all national agencies and offices to
conduct periodic consultations with appropriate local government units,
nongovernmental and peoples organizations, and other concerned sectors of the
community before any project or program is implemented in their respective
jurisdictions. (Emphases and underscoring supplied)
The above-quoted provisions of the Constitution and the LGC reveal the policy of
the State to empower local government units (LGUs) to develop and ultimately,
become self-sustaining and effective contributors to the national economy. As
explained by the Court in Philippine Gamefowl Commission v. Intermediate
Appellate Court:[228]
In the cases at bar, petitioners contend that the Congressional Pork Barrel goes
against the constitutional principles on local autonomy since it allows district
representatives, who are national officers, to substitute their judgments in utilizing
public funds for local development.[230]
Philconsa described the 1994 CDF as an attempt "to make equal the unequal" and
that "[i]t is also a recognition that individual members of Congress, far more than
the President and their congressional colleagues, are likely to be knowledgeable
about the needs of their respective constituents and the priority to be given each
project."[231] Drawing strength from this pronouncement, previous legislators
justified its existence by stating that "the relatively small projects implemented
under [the Congressional Pork Barrel] complement and link the national
development goals to the countryside and grassroots as well as to depressed areas
which are overlooked by central agencies which are preoccupied with megaprojects.[232] Similarly, in his August 23, 2013 speech on the "abolition" of PDAF
and budgetary reforms, President Aquino mentioned that the Congressional Pork
Barrel was originally established for a worthy goal, which is to enable the
representatives to identify projects for communities that the LGU concerned cannot
afford.[233]
The Court also observes that this concept of legislator control underlying the CDF
and PDAF conflicts with the functions of the various Local Development Councils
(LDCs) which are already legally mandated to "assist the corresponding sanggunian
in setting the direction of economic and social development, and coordinating
development efforts within its territorial jurisdiction."[234] Considering that LDCs
are instrumentalities whose functions are essentially geared towards managing local
affairs,[235] their programs, policies and resolutions should not be overridden nor
duplicated by individual legislators, who are national officers that have no lawmaking authority except only when acting as a body. The undermining effect on
local autonomy caused by the post-enactment authority conferred to the latter was
succinctly put by petitioners in the following wise:[236]
With PDAF, a Congressman can simply bypass the local development council and
initiate projects on his own, and even take sole credit for its execution. Indeed, this
type of personality-driven project identification has not only contributed little to the
overall development of the district, but has even contributed to "further weakening
infrastructure planning and coordination efforts of the government."
With this final issue on the Congressional Pork Barrel resolved, the Court now turns
to the substantive issues involving the Presidential Pork Barrel.