ICI and the P60-B PhilHealth SC decision

Christmas came early for the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) with the recent Supreme Court decision ordering the return of P60 billion to PhilHealth. The decision is more than a technical ruling; it is a vindication for the law, for public health, and for the Filipino people.

In a unanimous 136-page decision written by Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier, the Court struck down what had become a cynical scheme to turn social health insurance funds into what amounted to a hidden pork barrel, which can be connected to the ongoing flood control controversy involving the Department of Public Works and Highways and several other high-ranking officials.

The P60 billion began its life as “excess reserve funds” of PhilHealth. Under the 2024 national budget, specifically through Special Provision 1(d) in the General Appropriations Act of 2024, and guided by a directive from the Department of Finance under DoF Circular 003-2024, those “excess” funds of government-owned and -controlled corporations were ordered swept into the National Treasury.

From there, the money was earmarked not for health, but to fund “unprogrammed appropriations.” Among the beneficiaries were flood control projects of the DPWH. In effect, the funds meant to insure the health of ordinary Filipinos were diverted to finance questionable infrastructure spending.

The Supreme Court was blunt: Congress has no power to override the Universal Health Care Act through a budget line. Section 11 of the UHCA requires PhilHealth to keep reserves equivalent to two years of projected expenditures and explicitly bars any portion of that fund or its income from being transferred to the national government or any agency.

In its ruling, the Court underscored: “The issue was never about idle funds; it was about funds deliberately made idle at PhilHealth, turned into a pliable fund balance ripe for exploitation, wittingly or unwittingly.”

This is where accountability must begin. The decision names, but does not yet hold to account, certain individuals — the Court denied calls to pin liability on then-Finance Secretary (now Executive Secretary) Ralph Recto, or even former Executive Secretary Lucas Bernabe, former Chief Justice, for malversation or plunder.

But the factual backdrop remains: funds earmarked for health were funneled to projects under fire for corruption and ghost flood control schemes. As noted by former Justice Antonio T. Carpio, those transfers facilitated “substandard flood-control projects.”

This decision gives an important tool to the ICI, which is now investigating alleged anomalies in flood control spending. It is, in fact, a gift from the Supreme Court to the ICI — an assist to give the body the strong arm it may have been missing as of late. With the Court having voided the transfer that provided the financial lifeline for those projects, the ICI can now demand a full accounting of how much of PhilHealth’s money was spent, where it went, who paid contractors, and whether there was a paper trail for the unprogrammed appropriations.

More than that, the ICI, backed by the Court’s strong ruling, can push for criminal referral for those responsible for implementing what the Court called “grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction,” especially if funds went to bogus or substandard flood control projects.

For the public, this is a victory. It sends a message that social health insurance is not a discretionary pot for infrastructure pork and that any future attempts to redirect what belongs to public health must answer first to the law and to the people who depend on PhilHealth.

Now, Congress and the executive must comply without pretense. They must return the funds via the 2026 GAA as ordered by the Court. Any further delay or attempt to tinker with the directive would amount to contempt not just of the law but of every Filipino who believes that access to health must not be sacrificed at the altar of infrastructure deals.

The Supreme Court decision restores not only money but principle. It demands accountability from those who treated health funds as disposable. It gives the ICI ammunition to unmask corruption behind flood control megaprojects. And, at the end of the day, it demands that the government remember that public funds are a public trust.