BREAKING NEWS
DEVELOPING STORY

Malacañang to file motion for reconsideration vs. SC’s decision over GAA

Source:
Updated
As of
Published
October 21, 2026
October 21, 2026 8:41 PM
October 21, 2026 7:49 PM
PST
Updated on
As of
October 21, 2026
October 21, 2026
October 21, 2026 8:41 PM
PST
Video Source:
Image Source:

Malacañang believes that President Bongbong Marcos Jr. has no liability in the decision of the Supreme Court, declaring the 2024 and 2025 General Appropriations Act (GAA) unconstitutional.

“Wala tayong nakikitang anumang maaaring maging pananagutan ng pangulo kung siya naman din ay tumutupad lamang sa batas,” Usec. Claire Castro said

In a press briefing, Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Claire Castro stated that the administration complies with the law and they didn’t violate any provisions.

“Alam ng administrasyon na walang nilalabag na probisyon sa Konstitusyon. Ang administrasyon na ito ay tumutupad lamang sa mga naging proseso na isinasaad din naman sa batas,” she said

Hence, the Palace will file a motion for reconsideration through the Solicitor General.

“Magalang nating hinihiling sa Korte Suprema na muling suriin ang kanilang desisyon. Ipinag-utos na rin po sa Office of the Solicitor General na magsampa po ng motion for reconsideration,” Castro said.

The Palace also disagrees with some provisions issued from the decision of the court.

“Simula noong 2015, pinayagan ng Kongreso ang paglalabas ng pondo kapag lumagpas sa target ang koleksyon mula sa kahit isang tinutukoy na non-tax revenue source alinsunod sa iba pang kondisyon ng batas,”

Castro emphasized that the administration just followed the rule.

“Sinunod lamang ng administrasyong Marcos ang patakarang ito. Ang posisyon natin ay binigyang-kahulugan ng Araulio versus Aquino ang mga naunang budget law. Hindi ito ginawang permanenteng utos ng Konstitusyon ang mga kondisyon sa mga batas na iyon. Maaaring baguhin ng Kongreso ang mga kondisyon basta nasa loob ng Konstitusyon,” Castro explained

Usec. Castro also stated that nobody would be held administratively or criminally accountable if the funds are spent in good faith, citing the doctrine of operative fact.

“Kung ito naman lahat ay nagamit sa good in good faith, so walang magiging accountable criminally, administratively dahil nga yan mismo ang binabanggit sa doctrine of operative fact,” she said

‍

How do you feel about this article?
How do you feel about this video?
Amused
Happy
Neutral
Sad
Angry
Furious
Pick your vibe
You added to the count!
0
reaction
now.

Other News