Declare MIF unconstitutional, group asks SC

Several lawmakers petitioned the Supreme Court yesterday to declare unconstitutional the Maharlika Investment Fund Act of 2023 under Republic Act No. 11954 signed into law by President Marcos last 18 July to be managed by the Maharlika Investment Corporation which has a seed capital of P150 billion.

The petition was filed by Sen. Aquilino "Koko" Pimentel III, former congressman and Bayan Muna Chairman Neri Javier Colmenares, and former Bayan Muna congressmen Carlos Isagani Zarate and Ferdinand Gaite.

The group in their petition also asked the high bench to issue a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction or status quo ante order (SQAO) to stop immediately the implementation of RA 11954, and to conduct oral arguments.

Named respondents in the petition were Executive Secretary Lucas P. Bersamin, Finance Secretary Benjamin E. Diokno, the House of Representatives, and the Senate.

Three "serious grounds" were cited in the petition in seeking the unconstitutionality of Maharlika Investment Fund Act, namely: "RA 11954 is void because it was passed in violation of Section 26 (2), Article VI, of the 1987 Constitution; the test of economic viability as mandated under Section 16, Article XII of the Constitution was not complied with prior to the creation of the Maharlika Investment Corporation; and RA 11954 violates the independence of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas as provided for under Section 20, Article XII of the Constitution."

The petition claimed on alleged violation of Section 26 (2), Article VI of the Constitution, that "the Presidential certification of the Maharlika Bill in the House of Representatives and Senate did not comply with the constitutional requirement" and since the bill was not enacted in accordance with the Constitution, it "therefore did not become a law."

The petition pointed out "the Maharlika Investment Fund Act of 2023 therefore requires intense congressional scrutiny, genuine consultation with stakeholders, and a careful study by independent economic experts."

It said that "both Houses of Congress, however, went on the opposite direction and rushed the Maharlika bills and short-circuited the constitutionally mandated legislative processes, through an unnecessary and constitutionally infirm Presidential certification of urgency."