Justice Hernando’s Separate Opinion
Supreme Court Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando has declared that unprogrammed appropriations (UA), commonly referred to as the President’s pork barrel, are unconstitutional "by their nature and in any form." This stance was articulated in a separate opinion accompanying the Court's recent decision invalidating portions of the 2024, 2025, and 2026 budget laws.
Hernando’s position extends beyond the majority ruling. While the Court majority struck down Congress’ increases to these funds but upheld the mechanism itself, Justice Hernando voted to strike down all UAs in the 2024 and 2026 General Appropriations Acts for violating the Constitution.
In his opinion, Hernando described unprogrammed appropriations as a "conduit for graft" and "patronage politics at its vilest." He urged the Court to revisit the precedent set in Belgica v Ochoa, writing that "cutting off one head of the pork barrel Hydra just allows more to spring forth." This comment followed the eruption of the flood control scandal, which highlighted concerns over the misuse of such funds.
Majority Ruling and Budget Increases
The Supreme Court’s majority decision, penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, declared unconstitutional Congress’ P449.5-billion increase in unprogrammed appropriations under the 2024 budget. The ruling also invalidated a P17.99-billion hike in the Department of Public Works and Highways’ Special Road Fund for 2025.
The Court found that the 2024 bicameral conference committee shifted programs from programmed to unprogrammed categories, creating fiscal space for other spending. Petitioners alleged that lawmakers moved projects to assure funding for "pet projects." During oral arguments, economist Winnie Monsod told the Court that Congress itemized projects instead of abandoning the practice.
Justice Hernando supported these concerns with data showing a significant rise in unprogrammed appropriations. He presented a table indicating that Congress added P100 billion in UAs in 2022 and P219 billion in 2023. For the 2024 General Appropriations Act, the amount raised from P281.9 billion in the National Expenditure Program to P731.4 billion.
Execution of Funds and Executive Vetoes
The implementation of these funds has drawn scrutiny regarding the executive branch's role in their distribution. The Department of Budget and Management released P213.8 billion in UA for flagship projects in 2023 and 2024, with President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. signing off on the releases.
President Marcos’s approach to these allocations varied between budget years. In the 2024 budget, he vetoed only two items but left the broader UA structure intact. However, for the 2026 budget, President Marcos vetoed seven of 10 UA items worth P92.5 billion out of a total P243.4 billion, leaving P150.9 billion in unprogrammed funds.
Budget reform advocates noted that the vetoes spared certain programs often associated with graft-prone "soft pork," specifically the AICS, TUPAD, and MAIFIP initiatives. This selective vetoing has fueled ongoing debates about the transparency and accountability of how these discretionary funds are utilized by the executive branch.
Debate Over Terminology and Control
The characterization of these funds remains a point of contention between the judiciary and the executive. Executive Secretary Ralph Recto rejected the label of pork barrel, insisting that the budget is pork-free because legislators cannot interfere in its execution.
This defense contrasts with Justice Hernando’s view that the very existence of such unprogrammed appropriations facilitates patronage politics. While the majority ruling addressed specific illegal increases, Hernando’s separate opinion argues that the mechanism itself remains a constitutional violation, regardless of whether it is labeled as pork or not.