The Supreme Court was petitioned by a concerned citizen questioning the constitutionality of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s Executive Order No. 94, which created the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI).

In his filing, petitioner John Paul Tayam, a senior high school instructor, asked the Court to determine whether the ICI remains valid under the 1987 Constitution, saying the executive order effectively created a new government body and utilized public funds without congressional authorization.

Tayam in his petition said,“When you create a new commission, you are in effect creating a new government agency that requires a separate budget. They already moved money from the 2025 budget even though the Supreme Court has not yet issued a decision on it.” 

The petitioner was referring to the General Appropriations Act (GAA) of 2025, which he said is still under legal scrutiny.

Cayang also cited a precedent set by the Supreme Court in Meralco vs. Philippine Road Commission, where a similar body was declared unconstitutional during the Arroyo administration.

He added that the commission’s operations have raised transparency issues, claiming that some of its hearings were not made public despite earlier promises of livestream coverage. 

“They refused to publish their previous hearings,” he said. “That’s a violation of the citizens’ right to public information.”

Tayam’s concerns was the alleged exclusion of several officials, including former Public Works Secretary Mark Villar and House Speaker Martin Romualdez, from cases reportedly handled by the commission.

He asked the high bench to issue a ruling declaring EO 94 void if found unconstitutional, or at least to clarify the limits of the ICI’s authority. 

“It’s a win-win situation,” he said. “If the Supreme Court rules in my favor, then the ICI will be abolished. If not, at least its powers will be restrained.”

Tayam’s petition is expected to be formally docketed by the Supreme Court in November.