First posted here at 5:49am Nov. 14, 2013. Emergency powers for the President in the next 48 hours to transport food & water: here is the procedure
If the President does not exercise all of the powers he has in the next 48 hours to transport body bags, food, water, and personnel to Tacloban, Ormoc, and other devastated areas in Eastern Visayas, thousands more will die .
Next week is not good enough. It’s 48 hours. He has one remaining power that he has not exercised. I think it’s time.
Here’s the procedure:
Emergency powers. Procedure. The President should call up the Speaker of the House and the Senate President in the next five hours. Siguro nagbabakasyon ang mga senador at congressmen at tinatamad sila, WALA AKONG PAKIALAM, bumalik kayo dito at tumulong kayo. Tell the Speaker and the Senate President to convene in the next 12 hours, I don’t care if they are in Geneva or the Bahamas, get your a_ _ _ _ here; tell them: I am asking you to convene a special session – I am not just asking you, as President of the Republic, I am authorized to order you to convene a special session. Convene the special session in the next 12 hours. Tell them: I will announce it on TV in the next five hours that i am calling on the Senate and the House to convene a special session in the next 12 hours, so you better convene. If you don’t, i will order you. i am authorized.
Call the DOJ secretary and ask her to get ready.
Here is the provision (I hate for any President to use this power, but… there are dead bodies lying in the streets of Tacloban, and thousands more will die of dehydration, if not of crime, in the next 48 hours), here it is, use it well for the limited time of 48 hours:
Article VI, Sec. 23, par. 2: “In times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may, by law, authorize the President, for a limited purpose and subject to such restrictions as it may prescribe, to exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy. Unless sooner withdrawn by resolution of the Congress, such powers shall cease upon the next adjournment thereof.”
48 hours lang po ang gusto kong ibigay kasi medyo drastic ang mga kelangang take-over of facilities and utilities.
Call up the DOJ secretary; if government lawyers don’t know how to craft this, ask private lawyers.
You need to pay for the following utilities, facilities, and companies, pay for them. You have donations from many countries. Take over the facilities: carriers, private planes, airline companies, shipping companies. For the next 48 hours. But pay for them.
Clear all roads leading to Tacloban, Ormoc, and other areas. Pay heavy-equipment companies. Ask the lawyers to write it in the resolution. Take over all nearby heavy-equipment companies for their equipment and facilities in the next 48 hours. Tell your DPWH secretary that you will use all the powers you have at your command — and you can, you are authorized by the Constitution: Tell your DPWH secretary, I’ve used all my emergency powers, if you cannot supervise these heavy-equipment companies and clear the roads in the next 24 hours, you’re fired.
The residents need electricity. Use your emergency powers to acquire generator sets in nearby regions for 48 hours only, I know it’s drastic, but it’s necessary. Compensate the companies.
Another one. Sorry talaga. This has to be done.
Tell your DOJ secretary who will draft this: I need all the food items and drinking water available, in addition to the relief supplies that are held up here in Metro Manila. The nearer to Tacloban and Ormoc, the better. Just enough supplies, not all. Don’t cause a food run. Specify amounts. Please write it in the resolution, Ms. DOJ Secretary: grant of emergency powers. Government will acquire the required amount of food items, bottled water, and other supplies from the following food warehouses (be careful in the enumeration, don’t cause panic-buying in the nearby areas), bottled mineral water companies, grocery houses. It’s an emergency, we will pay them and take over them for 48 hours only. LET’S SAVE LIVES.
The government relief operations too slow, not enough volunteers. Tell the DOJ Secretary: I will pay for manpower agencies, send me 5,000 personnel. Tell them it’s an emergency, if they are unwilling, I can order them, I have been authorized. REPACK ALL THE SUPPLIES IN THE NEXT 24 HOURS, NON-STOP, we will pay for all of their hours, ALL RELIEF ITEMS SHOULD BE READY FOR TRANSPORT AFTER THE 24TH HOUR THAT I’VE CONTRACTED YOU.
Body bags, services of doctors, nurses, hospitals, medicine, medico-legal officers: Tell them: I need those body bags and your services. The government will compensate you.
Another one.
I hate to say this but…
Hotels, inns, housing facilities. There are thousands injured. Tell them: Government will pay for all of your personnel in the next 48 hours and for your rooms and facilities. Please do not refuse the injured, the sick, and the dying. I will be compelled to use force if you cannot help them, I am sorry.
The PNP and AFP still lacks the necessary security forces. Ask them how many more they need to maintain peace and order. A thousand more… Tell them you can deputize and contract security companies but they have to be screened well and supervised well.
Give instructions to the Defense secretary, the DPWH, DOTC, DILG, DSWD, NDRMMC: tell them: I have taken over all the utilities necessary (airplanes, ships, trucking companies, heavy-equipment companies) If you cannot transport the food and water that’s held up here in Metro Manila in the next 24 hours, you are all fired. Get moving.
This is good only if done in the next 48 hours to prevent the loss of more lives.
You know what? There are actually constitutional law issues with how the President used the newly exposed so-called Disbursement Acceleration Program or DAP.
According to Budget Secretary Butch Abad, they’re from savings.
The funds given to the senators, exposed by accidental, ex-future “whistleblower” Jinggoy (my god, I can’t believe I said whistleblower, but I put in in quotes! And I said accidental! And ex-future because he stopped short, hindi nya tinuloy-tuloy. He thought it was a simple case of bribery in exchange for convicting CJ Corona. I bet he didn’t realize there were constitutional law issues. And requisites. And if the President did not comply with the constitutional requirements, it’s an open-and-shut case of technical malversation. And a violation of the constitution. Now he has something to leverage with for the plunder case) totalled 1.107 billion pesos. The P1.107 B was released to the senators at, at least, P50 million pesos apiece; supposedly from savings of various government agencies.
Presumably, these savings, if true, accrued the previous year, 2012, and/ or 2011, when the concept of DAP was introduced in the national budget, according to the budget secretary.
Now… they – the DBM, the Palace spokespersons, the Palace lawyers, etc. etc., have not itemized , upon demand or upon questions from the news media, what these government agencies are, whence the so-called savings were taken. They are still listing them down daw. Why are they taking a long time to produce the list?
The manner by which the Office of thePresident re-allocated the funds should be examined, because the funds were juggled.
The Palace spokesperson said that the President realigned the savings based on Article VI ( Legislative Department), Section 25, paragraph 5, as follows:
Article VI Sec. 25 para. [5]: “No law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law from their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.”
Get your pens and papers — constitutional law construction (interpretation). This is a provision found under the article on the legislature, not the executive, granting powers to the legislature and the limits to those powers.
Section 25, paragraph 5 states that Congress cannot pass a law that authorizes any transfer of appropriations – that’s the general rule. Except that: “the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law,” be authorized to add funds to (or to “augment”) any item in their office from savings of other items in the appropriation for their office.
Since this is an exception, it is construed strictissimi juris or strictly in conformity with the terms of the provision. The policy of the Consitution as stated in said provision, is not to allow any law that authorizes the transfer of appropriations; except that the heads of the three branches of government (and the constitutional commissions) can, by law, be allowed to use up savings from one agency to another within their branch of the government. In case of doubt or dispute, the grant of authority will be interpreted strictly, to conform with the terms of the grant.
Therefore, the constitutional requisites must be complied with for the act to be considered as being in conformity with the Constitution, to wit:
First: Were there savings? Are all the savings from agencies under the Office of the President? (I think they can hurdle this).
Second, the constitution requires a law authorizing the President. Budget Secretary Abad said the DAP was introduced in the 2011 national budget or the 2011 General Appropriations Act. That’s a law, but what were the exact terms of the DAP provision in the 2011 GAA? Is it in conformity with the terms of Section 25 par. 5, i.e., to augment an item under the President’s office from savings from other items in his office?
Third, if it’s in the 2011 GAA, was it re-enacted in the 2012 GAA? The 2011 GAA lapses after the budget year. It is a “law” for that year, legalizing all appropriations for that year – unless re-enacted in full. Since the distribution to the senators occurred in 2012, was it re-enacted in the 2012? If re-enacted in 2012, what were its terms?
Let’s presume the provision in the GAA authorizing the President to re-distribute the DAP was couched in general terms, such as: to “ramp up spending and help accelerate economic expansion”, etc.. Since this is a motherhood statement, we go back to the constitutional provision.
That’s the fourth requisite: It must be: “to augment any item in the general appropriations law from their respective offices…”(Art. VI. Sec. 25, par. 5). “(T)o augment any item” means to add funds to the item. And “from their respective offices” refers to the office of each of the officials named in the provision: “the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions…” (Art. VI. Sec. 25, par. 5).
In other words, the President may be authorized to augment any item under his office, or add funds to any item under his office, sourced from “savings in other items of their respective appropriations.” (Art. VI. Sec. 25, par. 5). In other words: He can be authorized by law to use savings from one agency to another agency all under the Office of the President.
A simple illustration would be: If the Department of Tourism has savings of, say, ten million pesos, the President, under the DAP provision, can realign it to the building of schoolhouses and put it under the Department of Education (but for this, the DAP provision would have to be re-enacted for the succeeding year).
Here in the 2012 distribution of the DAP, the President realigned it to… the senators. Assuming the act conforms with the other requirements of the constitutional provision, does it conform with the constitutional requisite that it should be “to augment any item in the general appropriations law from their respective offices…”(Art. VI. Sec. 25, par. 5).
The Palace can argue, but the senators named implementing agencies, which were government agencies under the Office of the President.
But it was given to the senators. It is only by accident that some of the funds went to implementing agencies.
Ifit does not conform to the requisites of the Constitution, then you’re looking at the Revised Penal Code (Art. 220 on technical malversation, which is easier to prove than bribery, just produce the documents realigning the funds without authority and show damage); you’re also looking at disallowances: the 1.107 billion pesos has to be paid off the pockets of the government official who authorized the realignment; and — i hate to say this, I really do – but if it does not conform with the constitutional requisites, you’re looking at a violation of the Constitution and whether or not it’s culpable – I hate to say that, I hope nag-ingat kayo nang ginawa nyo ito (i hope you were careful when you juggled this).
(sorry i wrote this… in my posts two weeks ago, i justified the President’s exercise of the commander-in-chief powers in the way he directly supervised the armed forces during the Zamboanga standoff… i had nothing to post today and there was a constitutional law issue … and no one was spelling out in detail this particular constitutional law issue arising from the act of the President at realigning funds from agencies under his Office to the senators’ pockets, ehe, er, to the senators.)
