The ransacking of the national budget, which political pundits believe is imminent as the crucial 2028 ballot faceoff approaches, can now only be stopped through the intervention of the Supreme Court.

Its decision on petitions challenging the constitutionality of the General Appropriations Act (GAA) will be pivotal in preventing the budget from being used to bankroll self-preservation efforts.

Oral arguments were held on petitions questioning budget insertions, particularly Unprogrammed Appropriations (UA), covering the 2024, 2025 and 2026 GAAs.

The next rounds of consultations are scheduled for 2, 9 and 16 June.

The release of funds in the UA is at the Executive’s discretion, a quid pro quo for legislative pork insertions in the National Expenditure Program, thus making it a conspiracy between Congress and the Palace.

Striking down the practice of Congress expanding the UA beyond the executive’s proposal as unconstitutional may curb the mechanism.

A weak, delayed, or favorable verdict would give Congress the green light to reload the UA for Marcos’ final years.

The UA in the Marcos Jr. administration from 2023 to 2025 averaged P690 billion per year, more than four times the yearly average under Duterte and more than six times the annual average under Aquino III.

The explosion in discretionary standby funds was concentrated in the years leading up to the midterm election.

University of the Philippines (UP) economics professor emeritus Solita Collas-Monsod noted that since 2022, Congress has used the UA “to hide lump sum appropriations,” particularly those approved by the Bicameral Conference Committee (Bicam).

The UA approved by Congress consistently exceeded that proposed by the President in the 2023, 2024 and 2025 national budgets.

The pattern suggested the legislators were packing the budget with discretionary resources for election use.

The Bicameral Conference Committee, comprising a handful of lawmakers from both the House and Senate, altered the budget bill to expand the UA by more than P288 billion in the 2025 budget cycle alone.

For years, this was done behind closed doors, shielded from public scrutiny. The 2026 Bicam was streamed for the first time, but still its members approved a higher budget for the Assistance to Individuals in Crisis Situations (AICS) program, which promotes patronage politics and placed P243 billion in the UA.

Project spending was reshuffled to favor Marcos allies’ projects while undermining those of political rivals.

Big-ticket infrastructure projects were tossed to the UA, effectively delaying them because they were not given priority.

Marcos vetoed seven of 10 unprogrammed items when he signed the 2026 GAA, trimming the UA to P150.9 billion, the lowest since 2019.

The veto was politically timed to coincide with the widespread public outrage over the “most corrupt budget in history” label attached to the 2025 GAA.

The budget for next year, now being prepared, is the election eve spending plan that could preview how spending may be manipulated during the election year.

The machinery of an inflated UA, bicameral insertions, patronage-driven cash programs and selective infrastructure delays was built, refined and stress-tested between 2023 and 2025.

Whether it resurfaces in the 2027 and 2028 budgets will depend largely on the strength and scope of the Supreme Court’s ruling.

At stake is whether genuine fiscal reform can withstand the entrenched constraints of the crooked cabal that exposes the Marcos administration’s moro-moro.