(PNA file photo)
MANILA – A petition filed Friday before the Supreme Court questioned the constitutionality of a provision on unprogrammed appropriations (UA) in the 2024 national budget and tapping PHP89.9 billion from the Philippine Health Insurance Corp. (PhilHealth) funds.
The petitioners are led by Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel III and groups like the Philippine Medical Association, representing PhilHealth contributors.
The petition described the measure as "a grave disservice to the Filipino people who depend on PhilHealth for financial risk protection from illness and who are still heavily burdened by out-of-pocket health expenditure.”
“With consistently rising inflation and worsening social conditions, it is imperative that these funds be used exclusively for the implementation of the Universal Health Care (UHC) Act, the expansion of benefit packages and the reduction of premium contributions," the petitioners said.
The group said the provision in the 2024 General Appropriations Act (GAA) on UA is unconstitutional for being a “rider” and exceeds Congress’ power to appropriate funds.
"Despite Congress being vested with the powers of appropriation, the constitution demands that the expenditure of these funds have distinct items, qualifications, limitations, or conditions to which they are subject. The provision fails to meet these criteria, making it unconstitutional," the petitioners said.
They claimed that in diverting the funds to the unappropriated programs of the national budget, Congress gave the Executive branch the discretion to decide how to spend funds which have been earmarked specifically for the implementation of the UHC Act.
The Supreme Court has maintained in previous cases that any provision in a general appropriations bill which intends to repeal or amend other laws is unconstitutional.
"The UHC Act is only halfway through its 10-year implementation timeline with little progress to show. Its goals are far from being fulfilled, with Filipinos having to shoulder 45.95 percent of out-of-pocket health expenditure in 2022," the petitioners said.
“The myriads of problems plaguing the nation’s healthcare system mean that the purpose of the special fund persists, and that the fund should therefore not be used for purposes other than which it was created.”
They claimed that maneuvering of PhilHealth funds violates the people’s constitutional right to health by denying them access to quality and affordable health care goods and services.
“The petitioners are confident they have a strong case," the petition read. (PNA)
