(Due to its significance, we yield this space to this “statement of concern” on the pork barrel from a group of academics such as former Social Welfare secretary Prof. Judy Taguiwalo, professionals from various sectors and activists. – Ed.)
Outrage over massive corruption through the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) and the equally opaque presidential pork system led to the mammoth 2013 Million People March in Luneta and other protests nationwide.
The campaign led to the filing of a petition in the Supreme Court, asking that post-enactment intervention by lawmakers in the national budget be outlawed. The High Court granted the petition and declared PDAF unconstitutional.
When the Disbursement Acceleration Program or DAP was exposed by various groups as a form of presidential pork used to influence the outcome of the Corona impeachment trial, we again took to the streets to denounce corruption. A Supreme Court (SC) petition was later filed seeking to declare DAP as unconstitutional. The petition was again granted and the SC declared illegal the practice of pooling unused funds and using these as discretionary funds of the president for projects not in the General Appropriations Act or as part of congressional pork for some lawmakers. .
But even after the SC outlawed PDAF, lawmakers still found ways to circumvent the ruling through informal practices. Some retained their “entitlement” to funds in such a way they can freely intervene and propose their pet projects that they “inserted” into the budget of several departments. Pork barrel was alive and well and was used to ensure the control of the Executive over the Legislative branch. Lawmakers accessed these funds through various arrangements for patronage politics.
We maintain that all those previously involved in pork barrel corruption, whether it was PDAF or DAP, should be made accountable. We continue to demand the abolition of all pork. We demand that justice cover all parties involved in these scandals.
We oppose efforts by the Duterte administration, through the Department of Justice (DOJ), to make Janet Napoles – a principal accused in the PDAF scam – a state witness. She figured prominently in the scam, masterminding the creation of fake NGO operations to funnel public funds into the pockets of politicians. She has been less than truthful on several occasions. There is scant evidence of her trustworthiness, a requirement for state witnesses.
Even more important, we need to examine the DOJ’s motives: is this in pursuit of justice or a means to put pressure on political foes? DOJ has a track record of subverting its mandate by employing witnesses – like some convicted drug dealers – as tools for political persecution.
We also need to see if those implicated – formerly affiliated with the ruling Liberal Party in the past administration but since enrolled in Duterte’s PDP-Laban – will also be subject to investigation and appropriate charges.
We need to examine proposals to institutionalize the pork barrel system for lawmakers through the current Charter change efforts of the administration.
A regime that continues to uphold the pork barrel system through various schemes cannot be expected to truly seek justice for pork barrel corruption.
