Marcos admin to file motion for reconsideration vs SC ruling on unprogrammed funds
President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. presides over a situational briefing on the effects of the Southwest Monsoon enhanced by tropical cyclones Luis and Maymay at Malacañang Palace on August 10, 2026. Yummie Dingding, PPA Pool MANILA — President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s administration will file a motion for reconsideration to ask the Supreme Court to review its decision that declared as unconstitutional the use of unprogrammed funds in the 2024 and 2025 budgets, as well as certain provisions under the current spending bill.
The executive branch does not agree with several provisions in the high court’s decision and will be filing a motion for reconsideration through the Office of the Solicitor General, Communications Undersecretary Claire Castro said in a Palace briefing.
“Malinaw ang pasya ng Korte Suprema. Ang unprogrammed appropriations ay hindi likas na labag sa Konstitusyon. Hindi ito dineklara ng Korte Suprema na unconstitutional,” she said.
“Sa ating pananaw, pinanatili nito ang mekanismo sa papel ngunit ang pagtatakda ng kondisyong lagpas sa mga kondisyong inilatag ng Kongreso simula 2015 ay hindi lang magpapahirap nang husto sa paggamit nito. Ginawa nitong inutil at hindi na magagamit ang mekanismong ito para sa mga programa ng pamahalaan,” she said.
In its decision, the Supreme Court said that while the unprogrammed funds is not unconstitutional by itself, its use needs to have “clear limits and safeguards to preserve fiscal discipline, transparency, and accountability.”
“They become constitutionally infirm when they lack sufficient standards, effectively granting the Executive unchecked spending authority that weakens fiscal discipline and undermines funding for programmed projects when estimated government revenues are not realized,” the high court said.
Malacañang argued that the Marcos administration simply followed the practice of allowing the use of excess tax collections for unprogrammed appropriations, which has been in place since 2015, Castro said.
The Palace also cited the Araullo vs Aquino case as jurisprudence to make its case.
“Ang posisyon natin ay binigyang-kahulugan ng Araullo vs. Aquino ang mga naunang budget law. Hindi ito ginawang permanenteng utos ng Konstitusyon ang mga kondisyon sa mga batas na iyon,” she said.
“Maaaring baguhin ng Kongreso ang mga kondisyon basta nasa loob ng Konstitusyon,” she said.
“Kaya nga po tayo ay magsasampa sa pamamagitan po ng Office of the Solicitor General ng motion for reconsideration dahil alam ng administrasyon na wala namang nilalabag na batas, walang nilalabag na probisyon sa Konstitusyon,” she said.
“Ang administrasyon na ito ay tumutupad lamang sa mga naging proseso na isinasaad din naman sa batas.”
The 2026 national budget will be spent as planned while the Supreme Court has yet to release a final decision following the executive branch’s motion for reconsideration, Castro said.
“Lahat ng ginagawa ng administrasyon ay naaayon naman sa batas,” she said.
“Kung ano ang magiging huling desisyon ng Supreme Court, igagalang po,” she said.