By Ruth Abbey Gita-Carlos | Philippine News Agency
The Department of Budget and Management (DBM) on Thursday said the unprogrammed appropriations (UA) in the 2026 General Appropriations Act (GAA) are “constitutional [and] clearly defined.”
The DBM’s statement came after Caloocan 2nd District Rep. Edgar Erice and Mamamayang Liberal Rep. Leila De Lima filed a petition before the Supreme Court (SC), seeking to declare the inclusion of the UA in the 2026 national budget as unconstitutional.
Erice and De Lima asked the SC to declare null and void Section XLIII of the 2026 GAA for “being repugnant to the Constitution.”
They also requested the issuance of a temporary restraining order, writ of preliminary injunction and other injunctive remedies to halt the implementation, release, obligation, or expenditure of UA funds, citing the alleged “clear constitutional violations, the imminent and irreparable injury, and the absence of any other adequate remedy.”
While respecting the right of any individual or public official to pursue legal remedies, the DBM noted that the legality of the unprogrammed fund has already been upheld by the SC.
The DBM cited the Belgica vs. Executive Secretary ruling on Oct. 8, 2019 which “categorically ruled that the appropriation for the Unprogrammed Fund is constitutional.”
“The Court clarified that the Unprogrammed Appropriations are not a prohibited lump-sum fund, because they are accompanied by an annex that specifies the public purposes and corresponding amounts for which the funds may be used. As such, the UA complies with the constitutional requirement that appropriations must have a discernible purpose,” the DBM said.
“Taken together, Supreme Court jurisprudence and the design of the FY 2026 GAA demonstrate that the Unprogrammed Appropriations are constitutional, clearly defined, and now subject to even tighter fiscal discipline and safeguards,” it added.
The DBM said it remains committed to upholding the Constitution, ensuring prudent public spending, and implementing the national budget with transparency, integrity and accountability.
It explained that the UA, as supported by the SC, function as a standby appropriation, sourced only from excess or windfall revenues, and released strictly upon meeting clearly defined fiscal conditions and validation requirements.
“This design, according to the Court, is a legitimate budgeting mechanism that allows fiscal flexibility while preserving Congressional control over public funds,” it said.
The DBM also noted the substantial reduction of UA in the 2026 GAA to P150.9 billion, down from P363.4 billion in 2025, stressing that it is “well below [levels] recorded during the pandemic years.”
The highest UA was logged in 2023 at P807.2 billion, compared to P251.6 billion in 2022, before being reduced to P731.4 billion in 2024.
Citing President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.’s recent statement, the DBM said the UA are subject to strict controls to prevent misuse or discretionary spending.
“Releases may only be made when fiscal conditions are met and after careful validation,” the DBM said.
“To reinforce this discipline, the President vetoed approximately P92.5 billion worth of proposed UA items, including budgetary support to GOCCs, prior years’ LGU shares, personnel services requirements, industry support programs, insurance of government assets and interests, and certain government counterpart funds.”
