I Will Tell You The Truth About Binalewala Quotes In The Next 13 Seconds – Binalewala Quotes
Petitioners altercate clauses in the account apropos savings, alteration and appropriate purpose funds are adverse to the Supreme Court’s accommodation on the unconstitutionality of DAP and PDAF
Published 12:41 AM, September 02, 2015
Updated 12:42 AM, September 02, 2015
MANILA, Philippines – The Supreme Court was asked on Tuesday, September 1, to stop the accomplishing of several accoutrement in the 2015 civic account apropos accumulation and alteration of funds, as able-bodied as on the Appropriate Purpose Funds.
Former Civic Treasurer Leonor Briones and 14 others filed a address for certiorari and prohibition afore the SC for the arising of a acting abstinent adjustment and/or command of basic admonition adjoin Sections 70 and 73 of the Accepted Accoutrement of the 2015 Accepted Appropriations Act (GAA) or the civic budget.
Section 70 defines accumulation as “portions or balances of any appear appropriations… which accept not been obligated” as a aftereffect of assertive conditions, while Section 73 outlines rules in the alteration of allocation classes and the reprioritization of items of appropriations.
The analogue of accumulation was at the centermost of the altercation surrounding the Aquino administration’s Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) that was accounted actionable by the SC. (READ: Understanding the SC cardinal on the DAP)
“Petitioners alarm on this Honorable Court to anticipate the Legislative and the Executive from authoritative the Constitution or the cardinal in the Belgica or Araullo illusory,” the address said. “Whether it is through ambiguous or artistic schemes, the Executive and the Legislative branches should be prevented from accomplishing alongside what they cannot accurately do directly.”
The SC’s Araullo cardinal was about the DAP,