MINORITY lawmakers filed a petition before the Supreme Court on Thursday seeking to nullify all unprogrammed appropriations (UAs) in the P6.793-trillion 2026 national budget, citing constitutional violations and the alleged risks of misuse. House Senior Deputy Minority Leader Edgar Erice of Caloocan City and Mamamayang Liberal Party-list Rep. Leila de Lima submitted a petition for certiorari and prohibition, questioning Section XLIII of Republic Act 12314, or the 2026 General Appropriations Act. The petition also requested a temporary restraining order and other injunctive relief to halt the implementation of UA provisions while the case is under review. In their filing, the lawmakers argued that UAs — lump-sum standby funds set aside for certain projects or programs — allow government spending without guaranteed sources of financing, violating constitutional principles on public finance, budget accountability and Congress’ power of the purse. “A budget that authorizes expenditures without existing and identifiable sources of financing is not a budget in the constitutional sense,” the petition read. “It is a conditional permission to spend, the activation of which is left entirely to executive discretion. This is precisely what the Constitution was designed to prevent.” Constitutional violations Erice said in an interview that the petition cites several provisions of the 1987 Constitution that UAs allegedly violate, including: 1. Article VII, Section 22 — Expenditures must have a corresponding and existing source of financing; unprogrammed appropriations lack this requirement. 2. Article VI, Sections 25 and 29 — Mandates certification from the National Treasury that funds exist for proposed projects, ensuring lawful allocation of public funds. “For the 2026 budget, UAs ballooned to P243.4 billion approved by Congress,” Erice said. “After President Marcos vetoed P92.5 billion, roughly P151 billion remains, still without guaranteed sources of financing.” He emphasized that the speculative nature of these funds — dependent on loans, savings or excess revenues — makes them inherently unconstitutional. “All of these unprogrammed funds are speculative. There is no existing source of financing. Once released, they cannot be recalled. That’s why immediate intervention by the Supreme Court is essential.” Historical context During the interview, Erice noted that while unprogrammed funds have existed since 1989 during the administration of the late president Cory Aquino, their scale and misuse have dramatically worsened in recent years. “In the past, these were small amounts and were not misused. But in the 19th Congress and onward, the scale of diversion has been unprecedented,” he said. Erice claimed that over three years, about P1.45 trillion in unprogrammed appropriations was diverted from presidential priorities to politically favored projects. Foreign-assisted flagship projects, such as the subway and Philippine National Railways elevated rail, allegedly suffered reductions or replacement with smaller initiatives like flood control projects or street lighting, which often involved larger kickbacks. “For example, P399 billion originally intended for flagship transport projects was placed in the unprogrammed funds and replaced with lower-priority projects favored by certain lawmakers,” he said. He criticized the executive branch for allowing such diversions to occur under its watch, questioning why presidential priorities were compromised. “It is the duty and responsibility of the administration to ensure that national priorities are implemented, not sidelined for political maneuvering,” Erice said. “The big question is why this was allowed to happen during the current administration, when it directly affects the president’s legacy.” Separation of powers De Lima, meanwhile, stressed that the petition is not aimed at specific projects but at defending Congress’ constitutional oversight role. “Even if certain funds are guaranteed for projects, the reality of how they will be executed remains uncertain,” she said. “Congress is deprived of its constitutional role when lump-sum discretionary funds are included. Expediency alone should not override the safeguards of transparency and accountability.” Erice added that the petition also addresses a long-standing structural issue: discretionary lump-sum allocations allow Congress to bypass detailed review, undermining the separation of powers. “This is no longer a matter of minor budget adjustments. It has become a systemic problem where the executive and legislative branches collude, transforming the national budget into a congressional budget without proper scrutiny,” he said. President Marcos signed the 2026 budget on Jan. 5, trimming roughly P92.5 billion from the proposed standby funding. The final reserve fund stands at P150.5 billion, the lowest since 2019, according to Malacañang. The Palace said the budget could withstand legal scrutiny while affirming its respect for lawmakers’ right to challenge allocations. Oversight committee Also on Thursday, Sen. Erwin Tulfo called for the creation of a joint congressional oversight committee to closely monitor the implementation of the proposed 2026 national budget, warning that weaknesses in monitoring allowed portions of the 2025 budget to be “wasted” or misused. Speaking at the weekly Kapihan sa Senado media briefing, Tulfo said both the Senate and the House of Representatives must take a more active role in ensuring that public funds are spent as intended and reach their rightful beneficiaries. “I agree that both houses should have an oversight committee to monitor spending,” Tulfo said. “Since the 2025 budget was wasted, we have to make sure that the 2026 budget will not be wasted and that it goes to the right place.” Tulfo said traditional paper-based reporting, such as Commission on Audit, or Securities and Exchange Commission-style reports, is insufficient to prevent misuse. Instead, he proposed random, on-the-ground inspections of projects. “If I were asked, I wouldn’t rely on reports alone,” he said. “You need people on the ground checking projects randomly. They are hiding it. We need to make sure that if an area is randomly selected, that’s really where the money is going.” He said details on how such an oversight mechanism would be implemented remain unclear, as discussions among Senate and House leaders have yet to be finalized. Addressing allegations that lawmakers inserted projects into the budget, Tulfo denied personally inserting any items, saying the projects attributed to him were legitimate. “I didn’t insert anything. What they are saying is legit,” he said. Tulfo also pushed back against claims that the budget was entirely “pork-free,” noting persistent concerns over the unprogrammed appropriations. He said he supported the budget’s passage “with a heavy heart,” particularly due to doubts over the necessity and transparency of unprogrammed funds. “We saw it live. There was doubt about the unprogrammed items,” he said. “Why do we need unprogrammed funds? If there is money, then we will fund it.” Tulfo said he agreed with President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s decision to veto P92 billion worth of unprogrammed appropriations, arguing that such funds can become a temptation for abuse.