A third petition was filed on Monday in the Supreme Court (SC) challenging the constitutionality of Republic Act 12116, the General Appropriations Act (GAA) of fiscal year 2025.

The petition, filed by the Teachers’ Dignity Coalition (TDC), Freedom From Debt Coalition and the Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates, named President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin, the Senate, and the House of Representatives as respondents.

The two petitions were earlier submitted to the SC seeking to declare the 2025 GAA unconstitutional. The first petition was filed by former executive secretary and current senatorial candidate Victor Rodriguez and Davao City Third District Rep. Isidro Ungab.

The second petition was submitted by the 1Sambayan Coalition, Sanlakas, Advocates for National Interest, and several individuals.

Both the TDC et al. and Rodriguez et al. petitions seek the nullification of the entire 2025 GAA, while the 1Sambayan et al. petition targets three specific provisions within it.

The petitioners claim the government artificially inflated the education budget by aggregating non-traditional education-related funds from various agencies such as the Philippine Military Academy, Philippine National Police Academy, Philippine Public Safety College, and others.

In their 19-page petition, TDC et al. and their lawyer, Jose Aaron Pedros Jr., argue that the 2025 GAA violates Section 5 (5) of Article XIV of the 1987 Constitution, which mandates that the government assign the highest budgetary priority to education.

They point out that the current allocation of P737 billion for the Department of Education (DepEd) is significantly lower than the P1.1 trillion allocated to the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).

The petitioners claim the government artificially inflated the education budget by aggregating non-traditional education-related funds from various agencies such as the Philippine Military Academy, Philippine National Police Academy, Philippine Public Safety College and others.

This, they argue, created the false impression that the education sector received the largest share of the public funds.

The petitioners are also seeking a writ of prohibition and a temporary restraining order to prevent the implementation of RA 12116.

Meanwhile, the 1Sambayan et al. petition specifically challenges provisions in the 2025 GAA that allocate a lower budget for DepEd than for DPWH, provide zero subsidies for the Philippine Health Insurance Corporation, and allocate funds for the Ayuda sa Kapos and Kita Program which they claim is a congressional pork barrel.

Rodriguez’s and Ungab’s petition argues that the 2025 GAA is unconstitutional for failing to allocate mandatory funding for PhilHealth, unlawfully increasing appropriations beyond the President’s recommendations, and prioritizing infrastructure over education.

The petitioners charge that the 2025 GAA violates Article XIV, Section 5 (5) of the Constitution, giving the appearance of prioritizing education while not genuinely adhering to the constitutional mandate. Additionally, they argue the GAA violates Article VI, Section 25 (1) of the Constitution by increasing proposed appropriations for Congress and other agencies without the proper legal process.