The Supreme Court will begin hearing petitions this week challenging provisions in the 2026 national budget that allow the continued use of unprogrammed funds, putting billions in government spending under scrutiny.

The petitions question provisions that permit the ongoing use of unprogrammed appropriations, as well as adjustments to special accounts tied to infrastructure and other expenditures.

Petitioners argue these mechanisms allow significant flexibility in budget execution without sufficient safeguards and may exceed constitutional limits.

The cases form part of consolidated petitions challenging key provisions in the 2024, 2025 and 2026 General Appropriations Acts.

At the center of the dispute are unprogrammed appropriations and Special Accounts in the General Fund, which critics say have been expanded beyond what the Constitution allows.

Petitioners — including former Albay representative Edcel Lagman, former senator Koko Pimentel and former House speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, along with civic groups and other lawmakers — allege that Congress, through bicameral conference committees, inserted or increased budget allocations beyond legislative limits.

They claim these actions resulted in substantial funding increases across multiple fiscal years, including the allocation of hundreds of billions of pesos under unprogrammed appropriations.

The Supreme Court consolidated the petitions, citing common legal questions on congressional authority, budget execution and constitutional limits on appropriations.