ANOTHER petition challenging the constitutionality of the transfer of P89.9 billion in unused funds of the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation (PhilHealth) to the National Treasury was filed before the Supreme Court yesterday.
The petitioners are retired SC Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, former Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales, lawyer Howard Calleja, Fr. Robert Reyes and members of the 1Sambayan Coalition.
They were accompanied by former Commission on Audit commissioner and 2025 independent senatorial bet Heidi Mendoza, former Finance undersecretary Cielo Magno, and members of the UP Law Class of 1975.
Meanwhile, another group led by former Bayan Muna party-list representatives Neri Colmenares and Teddy Casiño asked the High Court to issue a temporary restraining order to halt the fund transfer.
The two petitions were filed on the day the third tranche of the PhilHealth unused funds amounting to P30 billion are scheduled for transfer.
The state health insurance agency has remitted to the National Treasury twice — P20 billion in May and P10 billion in August. The remaining P29.9 billion is slated to be remitted next month.
Carpio’s group, in the 46-page petition for certiorari and prohibition, also asked the magistrates to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) and a writ of preliminary injunction and other injunctive remedies to halt the transfer of the PhilHealth funds.
They argued that the circular issued by the Department of Finance (DOF) on February 27 this year allowing the fund transfer violated the 1987 Constitution.
The circular was issued in compliance with the 2024 General Appropriations Act directing the DOF to come up with guidelines to implement the collection of unprogrammed appropriations sourced from fund balances of government-owned-and-controlled-corporations.
The petitioners argued that Paragraph 1 (d), Chapter XLIII of the 2024 GAA is unconstitutional as it violated Article VI, Section 25(5) of the Constitution, which provides that “No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.”
USURPATION
Carpio’s group said the Finance chief is not among the officials listed in the provision.
“Pursuant to the principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius (the express mention of one thing in law implies the exclusion of others not expressly mentioned), the Department of Finance Secretary is not authorized to transfer unused or excess funds from GOCCs, such as PhilHealth, back to the National Treasury,” they added.
They said Finance Secretary Ralph Recto, in effect, has usurped executive powers by transferring unused PhilHealth funds to the treasury, a power they added is reserved solely for the President.
The petitioners further explained that even if the President was authorized by law to order the transfer of such funds, it would still be unconstitutional because PhilHealth funds are considered special funds that cannot be transferred unless their purpose has been fulfilled or abandoned, as provided under Article VI, Section 29 of the Constitution.
“Any attempt to reallocate PhilHealth funds for another purpose, regardless of its merit, would have no legal basis or unconstitutional, “they added.
Recto has defended the transfer saying government is only doing what Congress has empowered it to do. He also assured the public that taking back PhilHealth’s excess funds would not affect its ability to provide services.
Colmenares and Casiño, in their petition, also urged the High Court to tap Ibon Foundation Director Sonny Africa as an amicus curiae for next year’s oral arguments on the case.
They said Africa will be able to help the Court thresh out the issue considering his research and study on the budget, economic issues, and budgetary processes.
Earlier, the SC set oral arguments for Jan. 14, 2025 on the petitions filed by the group of opposition Sen. Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III and Bayan Muna.
