Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) asked the Supreme Court for a five-day extension to file its response regarding the petition questioning the legality of the 2025 General Appropriations Act (GAA).
In a four-page motion filed on Friday, February 21, the OSG said, “Although the draft of the said comment has already been finished, it is still undergoing further revision and/or correction before it can be filed.” It added that the motion was “not intended to delay the proceedings but solely due to the foregoing reasons.”
The Senate, represented by Senate President Francis, the House of Representatives, led by Speaker Martin Romualdez, and Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin, were ordered by the Supreme Court on February 4 to respond to the petition for certiorari and prohibition filed by former President Rodrigo Duterte’s allies in late January within 10 days of notice.
The OSG received the resolution on February 12, making the response originally due on February 22.
The petition was filed by former Executive Secretary Victor Rodriguez, Davao City Rep. Isidro Ungab, and other allies of Duterte. They claim the bicameral conference committee included blank items in the General Appropriations Bill (GAB), violating the 1987 Constitution.
Additionally, they criticized the GAA as “unconstitutional” due to the lack of funding or nonallocation of funds for the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. and its push for infrastructure over education.
The government’s budget for agencies, projects, and programs is outlined in the GAB, a proposed law. It is reviewed by the Senate and the House of Representatives, and the findings are reconciled in a bicameral report. It becomes the GAA upon the President’s approval and signature.
The High Court has required the submission of the original copies of the 2025 GAB and the 2025 General Appropriations Enrolled Bill before the preliminary conference on February 28.
Respondents must comply with the order by submitting the documents in person no later than 12 noon today (Feb. 24) as part of the ongoing legal proceedings.
How do you feel about this article?
