Counsels for petitioners on Tuesday urged the Supreme Court to declare unprogrammed appropriations unconstitutional, arguing that the mechanism operates as “blank checks” and a “shadow budget” that undermines Congress’ power over public funds.

During oral arguments on consolidated petitions, lawyer Vaupetroanji Peña, representing Caloocan Rep. Edgar Erice and party-list Rep. Leila de Lima, pressed the Court to strike down the practice to uphold constitutional limits on government spending.

“This Honorable Court must declare unprogrammed appropriations as unconstitutional,” Peña said, stressing that “only Congress wields the power of the purse” and that public spending must be anchored on “ascertainable funding.”

Peña likened the mechanism to invalid financial instruments, warning that unprogrammed appropriations function either as “blank checks” or as “checks drawn against insufficient funds.” 

She argued that such funds are effectively issued by the Executive rather than authorized within clear limits set by Congress.

“These checks must be voided before they are even honored and drawn against the account of the Filipino people,” she said.

In a separate argument, lawyer Jerico Salenga, counsel for former senator Aquilino Pimentel III and former Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, said the current design of unprogrammed funds violates constitutional restrictions on appropriations.

Salenga cited the constitutional rule that Congress may not increase the budget proposed by the President, describing it as a safeguard for fiscal discipline and coherence in government spending.

“Yet in this case, Congress expanded unprogrammed appropriations far beyond what was recommended,” he said.

He pointed out that the number of purposes covered by unprogrammed funds ballooned “from eight… to 51,” transforming what was intended as a limited standby mechanism into a broad spending authority.

Salenga emphasized that the issue goes beyond the total amount of funds involved. 

“The Constitution is not concerned only with arithmetic totals but with the power those figures represent,” he said.

He argued that by expanding both the scope and flexibility of unprogrammed appropriations, Congress effectively increased its authority to spend beyond constitutional limits.

Salenga said the current system amounts to “a shadow budget that is contingent, expandable, and dependent on discretion after enactment.”