Modern ‘maletas’ — The 2026 unprogrammed funds

Critics, including Senator Imee Marcos, have sounded the alarm over the 2026 General Appropriations Act (GAA), which supposedly contains a “sneaky” pork barrel in the form of unprogrammed appropriations and “chopped up” allocations.

The Allocations: There are speculations that these funds could be used as “bargaining chips” to secure the supermajority support for the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte.

A retired state auditor asked if it would be wise for the Supreme Court (SC) to issue a preempting alarm against such machination.

In the Philippine legal system, whether it is wise or even permissible for the SC to issue a pre-emptive warning against political machinations, such as the use of funds for impeachment, is a matter of intense constitutional debate.

As of late April 2026, the SC is walking a fine line between respecting Congress’s sole power to impeach and its duty to prevent grave abuse of discretion.

1. The Power of Judicial Review vs “Sole Power” to Impeach

Under the Constitution, the House of Representatives has the “exclusive power to initiate,” and the Senate has the “sole power to try” impeachment cases.

Historically, the SC has been hesitant to interfere in the merits of an impeachment. However, recent rulings have clarified its role.

2. Procedural Oversight: The SC has demonstrated its willingness to intervene when constitutional rules are violated. On 25 July 2025, the SC famously nullified a previous impeachment attempt against Vice President Duterte, ruling that it was barred by the one-year rule.

3. Grave Abuse of Discretion: Under Article VIII, Section 1, the Supreme Court can review any act of any branch of government if it involves “grand abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.” This includes the use of public funds — like unprogrammed appropriations — as “incentives” for political votes

Efforts ramped up

As of April 2026, impeachment proceedings against Vice President Duterte in the House of Representatives have intensified, characterized by high-profile testimony and significant political debate.

Here are the latest developments based on reports.

1. House Proceedings: The House Committee on Justice has been conducting what is described as a “miss trial,” issuing subpoenas for documents, including Statements of Assets and Liabilities and Net Worth and tax records.

2. Key Testimony: On 14 April 2026, Ramil Madriaga, a self-confessed alleged former bagman of the Vice President, testified regarding the allegations against her.

3. Allegations: The impeachment complaint focuses on several issues, including alleged misuse of confidential funds, betrayal of public trust, and other high crimes.

4. Duterte’s Position: The camp of Vice President Duterte has largely boycotted the proceedings, according to a DAILY TRIBUNE report.

5. Political Context: The impeachment push comes amid rising economic concerns for Filipinos, leading to debates over whether the House should prioritize the impeachment over economic issues.

6. The situation remains fluid with both sides actively battling to control the public narrative, as reported.

The impeachment proceedings and intense political noise surrounding Vice President Duterte in 2025 and early 2026 have had a most moderate, localized impact on the Philippine economy, primarily affecting capital markets and causing a distraction, rather than a direct, structural collapse. While concerns exist regarding political stability, the overall economy has remained resilient.

Email: arturobesana2@gmail.com