1

Congress of the Republic of the Philippines

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
House of Representatives Complex
Constitution Hills, Quezon City



IN THE MATTER OF THE IMPEACHMENT OF
BENIGNO S. AQUINO III AS PRESIDENT OF THE
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES


ACT Teachers Party-List Representative ANTONIO L.
TINIO; National Artist for Literature BIENVENIDO
LUMBERA; CYNTHIA N. LUMBERA; Alliance of
Concerned Teachers Philippines Chairperson (ACT
Philippines) BENJAMIN G. VALBUENA, Secretary
General FRANCISCA L. CASTRO, and Deputy
Secretary General VLADIMER A. QUETUA; Quezon
City Public School Teachers Association (QCPSTA)
President DR. PRISCILLA D. AMPUAN; ACT National
Capital Region-Union Secretary JOSELYN F.
MARTINEZ; Manila Public School Teachers
Association (MPSTA) President LOUIE L. ZABALA;
ACT State Universities and Colleges Spokesperson
CLEVE KEVIN ROBERT V. ARGUELLES and Local
Universities and Colleges Representative VERONICA
L. GREGORIO; All-UP Workers Union (AUPWU)
Former National President FELIX PARIAS and
National President DR. RAMON GUILLERMO;
Congress of Teachers and Educators for Nationalism
and Democracy (CONTEND-UP) Chairperson DR.
GERARDO LANUZA; UP Kilos Na Convenor SARAH
JANE RAYMUNDO; and AIM Faculty Association
President PROF. EMMANUEL LEYCO,


Complainants.




IMPEACHMENT COMPLAINT
AGAINST PRESIDENT BENIGNO SIMEON AQUINO III

2

PREFATORY

The people have risen up against institutionalized patronage and
legitimized graft and corruption as embodied by the pork barrel system. Their
nationwide rage and activism pushed the Supreme Court (SC) to promulgate
Belgica vs. Ochoa
1
and declare as unconstitutional portions of that system, the
Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) or congressional pork and two
forms of presidential pork, for violating the principles for a democratic and
transparent government.

Ruled the High Court, provisions of past and present Congressional
Pork Barrel Lawswhich authorize/d legislatorswhether individually or
collectively organized into committeesto intervene, assume or participate in
any of the various post-enactment stages of the budget execution, such as but
not limited to the areas of project identification, modification and revision of
project identification, fund release and/or fund realignment, unrelated to the
power of congressional oversight[and] all informal practices of similar import
and effect.
2


The SC has ruled that the practice of dealing pork to lawmakers (1)
violates constitutional principles of separation of powers, the non-delegability
of legislative power, and the presidential veto power; (2) impairs public
accountability; and (3) subverts genuine local autonomy. In other words,
congressional pork, however dealt, destroys the foundations of democratic
and transparent government and allows the peoples money to be used for
purposes other than their interest.

The Decision embodies the letter and spirit of the law, clear and
undeniable to everyonemost especially the President, the highest official
duty-bound to implement all laws. This law, in turn, ensures that the interests
of the people are served, through the proper and transparent management
and disbursement of the funds they have entrusted to the government.

In spite of the Decision, and contrary to his pronouncements to the
public that it is time to abolish PDAF,
3
President Benigno Simeon Aquino III
has retained the congressional pork barrelalbeit in ways that are hidden in
plain sight, an open secret running rampant in agencies directly under his
watch.

By his perpetuation of informal practices of dealing pork barrel to
members of Congress to the detriment of public interest, President Benigno

1
G.R. No. 208566, 19 November 2013. Hereinafter, the Decision.
2
The Decision, pages 69-70.
3
Pahayag ni Pangulong Aquino ukol sa abolisyon ng PDAF, ika-23 ng Agosto 2013. Available in
http://www.gov.ph/2013/08/23/pahayag-ni-pangulong-aquino-ukol-sa-abolisyon-ng-pdaf-ika-23-ng-agosto-
2013/. Last accessed on 10 August 2014.
3

Simeon Aquino III broke his oath of office and betrayed the public trust. By his
blatant violation of the legal prohibition against congressional pork, he
deliberately, gravely, and culpably violated the Constitution. With these acts,
he has proven himself unfit and undeserving to continue occupying the seat
entrusted to him by the Filipino people.


THE ACTION

1. This is an impeachment complaint against President Aquino for
his betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution in relation
to his blatant violation of the law prohibiting congressional pork barrel laid
down in the Belgica v. Ochoa ruling.

2. Complainants accuse Benigno Simeon Aquino III, President of the
Republic of the Philippines, of betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of
the Constitution. This Complaint will detail how he, as Chief Executive, has laid
in place procedures and practices which allow legislators to exercise post-
enactment discretion, intervention, and participation in the use of lump-sum
funds appropriated for a number of national government agencies. In short,
he is responsible for perpetuating the prohibited Congressional Pork Barrel.


JURISDICTION

3. This verified impeachment complaint is being filed before the
House of Representatives, for immediate referral to its Committee on Justice
pursuant to its rules and Article XI, Section 3 of the 1987 Philippine
Constitution.
4



PARTIES

4. Complainants, all Filipinos and of legal age, are:

a. ACT Teachers Party-List Representative Antonio L. Tinio, a
member of the House of Representatives;

b. Bienvenido Lumbera, National Artist for Literature;

c. Cynthia N. Lumbera;

4
Section 2 (a) and (b), Rule II of the Rules of Procedure in Impeachment Proceedings in the House of
Representatives in relation to Section 42, Rule X and Section 28 (aa), Rule IX of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and Francisco, Jr. vs. House of Representatives (G.R. No. 160261, 10 November 2003), which
implement Article XI, Section 3 of the Constitution on the initiation of impeachment complaints.
4


d. Benjamin G. Valbuena, Chairperson of the Alliance of Concerned
Teachers Philippines;

e. Francisca L. Castro, Secretary General of ACT Philippines;

f. Vladimer A. Quetua, Deputy Secretary General of ACT Philippines;

g. Dr. Priscilla D. Ampuan, President of Quezon City Public School
Teachers Association (QCPSTA);

h. Joselyn F. Martinez, Secretary of the ACT National Capital Region-
Union;

i. Louie L. Zabala, President of the Manila Public School Teachers
Association (MPSTA);

j. Cleve Kevin Robert V. Arguelles, Spokesperson of ACT State
Universities and Colleges;

k. Veronica L. Gregorio, Local Universities and Colleges
Representative of ACT SUCs;

l. Felix Parias, Former National President of All-UP Workers Union
(AUPWU);

m. Dr. Ramon Guillermo, National President of AUPWU;

n. Dr. Gerardo Lanuza, Chairperson of Congress of Teachers and
Educators for Nationalism and Democracy (CONTEND-UP);

o. Prof. Sarah Jane Raymundo, Convenor of UP Kilos Na; and

p. Prof. Emmanuel Leyco, President of the AIM Faculty Association.

5. Complainants may be served with orders and notices from this
House of Representatives through counsel at the address indicated below.

6. Respondent Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III is the incumbent
President of the Republic of the Philippines. He may be served with a copy of
this complaint and notices from the House of Representatives at New
Executive Building, Malacaang Palace Compound, J.P. Laurel Street, San
Miguel, Manila.
5



STATEMENT OF FACTS

7. Although discretionary lump sum funds such as PDAF, Malampaya
funds, and the Presidents Social Fund have been plaguing the public coffers
for decades, multibillion-peso scams erupted one after another beginning mid-
2013. News and official government reports, mainly Report No. 2012-03
released by the Special Audits Office of the Commission on Audit
5
on the
allocation and use of Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) and
Various Infrastructure including Local Projects (VILP), proved that these
amorphous funds are highly vulnerable to dissipation in favor of the likes of
Janet Lim-Napoles, her fake NGOs, and her politician cohorts.

8. Aside from detailing how billions of public funds are lost to graft
and corruption, these accounts show how discretionary lump sums are used
for political patronage from the lowest level of government up to the highest.
News investigations and analyses detail how the PDAF and its earlier
incarnations greased the wheels of Congress
6
and, in the process, deprived the
people of basic social services.
7


9. Widespread public outrage against the pork barrel system fuelled
the August 26 Million People March in Luneta, Manila and in several protest
sites in and out of the country. It also gave rise to various anti-pork alliances
across sectors and classes, all demanding the abolition of all forms of pork, the
prosecution of those accountable for looting the public coffers, and the
rechanneling of these funds to basic social services. One such alliance is the
#AbolishPork Movement, which would later spearhead the Peoples Initiative
Against Pork (PIAP) to enact a law abolishing the pork barrel system.

10. From late August to early September 2013, three petitions were
filed before the SC questioning the constitutionality of the PDAF. On 10
September, the SC issued a temporary restraining order enjoining the DBM,
National Treasurer, Executive Secretary, or any person acting under their
authority from releasing the remaining PDAF allocated to Members of
Congress under the General Appropriations Act (GAA) of 2013.
8



5
Hereinafter, the COA Report.
6
Pork is a Political, Not A Developmental, Tool. Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, Chua, Yvonne T.
and Cruz, Booma http://pcij.org/stories/2004/pork.html. Last accessed on 9 August 2014. Cited in Belgica
(page 3).
7
The people have spoken: End institutionalized plunder now! Center for People Empowerment in Governance
Issue Analysis No. 03, 25 August 2013. Posted in
http://www.cenpeg.org/IA%202013/PDF/CenPEG_Analysis_End_Pork_Barrel_Aug_25_2013.pdf. Last
accessed on 10 August 2014.
8
Republic Act 10352
6

11. On 19 November 2013, the SC promulgated Belgica v. Ochoa,
which defines the pork barrel system as the collective body of rules and
practices that govern the manner by which lump-sum, discretionary funds,
primarily intended for local projects, are utilized through the respective
participations of the Legislative and Executive branches of government,
including its members.
9


12. The outlawed PDAF or congressional pork barrel, on the other
hand, is a kind of lump-sum, discretionary fund wherein legislators, either
individually or collectively organized into committees, are able to effectively
control certain aspects of the funds utilization through various post-
enactment measures and/or practices.
10


13. Concluded the High Court:

The Court renders this Decision to rectify an error which has persisted in the
chronicles of our history. In the final analysis, the Court must strike down the
Pork Barrel System as unconstitutional in view of the inherent defects in the
rules within which it operates. To recount, insofar as it has allowed
legislators to wield, in varying gradations, non-oversight, post[-]enactment
authority in vital areas of budget execution, the system has violated the
principle of separation of powers; insofar as it has conferred unto legislators
the power of appropriation by giving them personal, discretionary funds
from which they are able to fund specific projects which they themselves
determine, it has similarly violated the principle of non[-]delegability of
legislative power; insofar as it has created a system of budgeting wherein
items are not textualized into the appropriations bill, it has flouted the
prescribed procedure of presentment and, in the process, denied the
President the power to veto items; insofar as it has diluted the effectiveness
of congressional oversight by giving legislators a stake in the affairs of
budget execution, an aspect of governance which they may be called to
monitor and scrutinize, the system has equally impaired public
accountability; insofar as it has authorized legislators, who are national
officers, to intervene in affairs of purely local nature, despite the existence
of capable local institutions, it has likewise subverted genuine local
autonomy x x x.

For as long as this nation adheres to the rule of law, any of the multifarious
unconstitutional methods and mechanisms the Court has herein pointed out
should never again be adopted in any system of governance, by any name or
form, by any semblance or similarity, by any influence or effect.
Disconcerting as it is to think that a system so constitutionally unsound has
monumentally endured, the Court urges the people and its co-stewards in
government to look forward with the optimism of change and the awareness
of the past. At a time of great civic unrest and vociferous public debate, the

9
The Decision, page 35.
10
Ibid.
7

Court fervently hopes that its Decision today, while it may not purge all the
wrongs of society nor bring back what has been lost, guides this nation to the
path forged by the Constitution so that no one may heretofore detract from
its cause nor stray from its course. After all, this is the Courts bounden duty
and no others.

WHEREFORE, the petitions are PARTLY GRANTED. In view of the
constitutional violations discussed in this Decision, the Court hereby declares
as UNCONSTITUTIONAL: (a) the entire 2013 PDAF Article; (b) all legal
provisions of past and present Congressional Pork Barrel Laws, such as the
previous PDAF and CDF Articles and the various Congressional Insertions,
which authorize/d legislatorswhether individually or collectively
organized into committeesto intervene, assume or participate in any of
the various post-enactment stages of the budget execution, such as but not
limited to the areas of project identification, modification and revision of
project identification, fund release and/or fund realignment, unrelated to
the power of congressional oversight; (c) all legal provisions of past and
present Congressional Pork Barrel Laws, such as the previous PDAF and CDF
Articles and the various Congressional Insertions, which confer/red
personal, lump-sum allocations to legislators from which they are able to
fund specific projects which they themselves determine; (d) all informal
practices of similar import and effect, which the Court similarly deems to be
acts of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction x
x x.
11


14. In sum, the SC outlawed the PDAF or congressional pork barrel
because it violates separation of powers, non-delegability of legislative
power, and the Presidents power to veto items in an appropriations law;
impairs public accountability; and subverts genuine local autonomy. These
principles for democratic government and transparent management of the
peoples money are diluted if not altogether defeated however way pork is
cooked and served to lawmakers, whether through formal measures written
into the law or informal practices institutionalized in government agencies.
12


15. The Decision also recognizes that congressional pork perpetuates
political patronage, citing recent and not-so-recent historyOver the
decades, pork funds in the Philippines have increased tremendously, owing in
no small part to previous Presidents who reportedly used the Pork Barrel in
order to gain congressional support.
13
Adds Justice Arturo Brion on his
separate concurring opinion:

A lump sum appropriation like the PDAF cannot and should not pass
Congress unless the Executive and the Legislative branches collude, in which
case, the turn of this Court to be an active constitutional player in the budget

11
The Decision. Emphases supplied.
12
The Decision, page 43.
13
The Decision, pages 17-18. Citations omitted and emphases supplied.
8

process comes into play. The PDAF, as explained in the Opinions of Justice[s]
Carpio and Bernabe, is a prime example of a lump sum appropriation that,
over the years, for reasons beneficial to both branches of government, have
successfully negotiated the congressional legislative process, to the
detriment of the general public.

x x x

[C]urrent practices [prove] that Congress has given him [the President] his
own pork barrelgenerally, lump sum funds that he can utilize at his
discretion without passing through the congressional mill and without
meaningful congressional scrutiny. As I have stated, this is a constitutionally
anomalous practice that requires Court intervention as the budgetary
partners will allow matters to remain as they are unless externally
restrained by legally binding actions.

Congress, for its part, is given significant authority to decide on the projects
and activities that will take place, and to allocate funds for these national
undertakings. It has not at all complained about the loss of its budgeting
prerogatives to the President; it appeared to have surrendered these
without resistance as it has been given its share in budget implementation
as the current PDAF findings show. Thus, what confronts the Court is a
situation where two partners happily scratch each others back in the pork
barrel system, although the Constitution prohibits, or at the very least,
limits the practice.
14


16. Two days after the Decision was handed down, the Aquino
administration through Presidential Communications Operations Office
Secretary Herminio Sonny Coloma Jr. said that the administration will
comply with the decision of the Supreme Court (SC) declaring the Priority
Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) unconstitutional.
15


17. A month after the decision was handed down, the Aquino
administration enacted the General Appropriations Act for 2014 (2014 GAA).
16

His administration branded it a pork-less budget, because the PDAF item was
deleted. The administration explained that sum of the amounts from the
P24.25-billion item were realigned, at the instance of legislators, to other
items in several agencies.

18. Of these realignments, a total of P20,761,644,000 are allotted
for new programs of the Departments of Health (DOH), Labor and Employment
(DOLE), and Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), and Public Works and

14
Justice Brions separate opinion to the Decision, pages 9 and 11. Emphases on the original.
15
Aquino government to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court declaring the Priority Development
Assistance Fund unconstitutional posted in http://www.pcoo.gov.ph/archives2013/nov21.htm Last accessed
on 10 August 2014.
16
Republic Act 10633
9

Highways (DPWH); the Commission on Higher Education (CHED); and the
Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA). These
amounts are the House pork, to wit:

IMPLEMENTING
AGENCY
PROGRAM
AMOUNT
(in 000
Pesos)
DOH Assistance to Indigent Patients
- for hospitalization and the grant of assistance to
indigent and poor patients (Special Provision [SP]
8)
17

3,193,950

DOLE Government Internship Program (GIP) and Tulong
Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged Workers
TUPAD Project
- for the payment of stipend of beneficiaries
equivalent to seventy five percent (75%) of the
existing minimum wage in the area
- for the payment of wages of displaced workers
resulting from weather and regulatory shocks and
internal conflict during their short-term
employment under the TUPAD Project (SP 8)
18

1,022,000

TESDA Special Training for Employment Program
- for the conduct of community-based specialty
training for employment (SP 4)
19

1,022,000
DSWD Crisis Intervention Program
- to provide financial assistance to individuals and
families in crisis situations (SP 4)
20

4,090,000
DPWH Regional and Local Infrastructure Program
- for the construction and rehabilitation of the
following local infrastructures:
a.) Local Roads and Bridges;
b.) Classrooms and Academic Buildings;
c.) Multi-Purpose Buildings; and
d.) Levels 2 and 3 Water Supply Systems (SP 8)
21

7,309,494

CHED Scholarship Program
- for the grant of scholarship assistance to
deserving students (SP 3)
22

4,124,200
TOTAL HOUSE PORK 20,761,644

19. The SPs covering the programs funded by House pork have the
same provisos ostensibly intended to prevent a repeat of the Napoles scam,
including a condition that the beneficiary shall first comply with requirements

17
2014 GAA, page 407.
18
Ibid, page 458.
19
Ibid, page 477.
20
Ibid, page 553.
21
Ibid, page 508.
22
Ibid, pages 649-650.
10

of the agency and the school or hospital, an authority for the agency to use up
to 1% of the fund for administrative costs, an authority for the agency to
engage a third party agency or organization to monitor the programs
implementation, a ban on delegation or transfer of funds to CSOs, and a
condition that the programs implementation shall be subject to guidelines to
be issued by the agency.

20. These programs were not among those in the proposed budget of
the President for 2014.
23
Neither were they deliberated upon by the House of
Representatives as part of the General Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year
2014.
24
Budget Secretary Florencio Abad, Jr. also admitted that the funds are
not part of their regular programs.
25
These SPs were added only after the
General Appropriations Bill went past the Lower House and the promulgation
of Belgica, when it became glaring that retention of PDAF will be not only be
unpopular but illegal.

21. Senators, for their part, realigned their Senate pork,
amounting to a total of P1,794,500,000 to the following Special Purpose Funds
and line agencies:

SENATOR
SPECIAL PURPOSE FUND OR
AGENCY AUGMENTED
AMOUNT
(in million pesos)
A. Cayetano Calamity Fund 200.00
P. Cayetano Calamity Fund 200.00
Santiago Calamity Fund 200.00
Ejercito Calamity Fund 200.00
Recto Calamity Fund 200.00
Estrada Local Government Support Fund:
Lla-lo, Cagayan
LGSF: Caloocan
LGSF: Manila
50.00

50.00
100.00
Lapid DPWH
DOH
DSWD
193.00
5.00
2.00
Revilla DPWH
DOH
UP System
84.50
75.00
35.00
Trillanes PNP
Philippine Army
Philippine Navy
CHED
TESDA
7.40
27.95
22.00
36.20
4.00

23
Or the 2014 National Expenditure Program.
24
House Bill 2630.
25
Pork still working for lawmakers, Abad: Whats wrong with political patronage? by Salaverria, Leila B.,
Philippine Daily Inquirer, 6 March 2014 (http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/582716/pork-still-working-for-
lawmakers. Last accessed on 10 August 2014.)
11

DOH 102.45
1,794.50

22. Explaining the realignments, Abad told the Senate Committee on
Finance that the realigned funds are for scholarships under state universities
and the Commission on Higher Education (20%); employment under DOLE and
TESDA (10%); medical assistance under the DOH (15%); assistance to persons
in crisis under the DSWD (20%), and local infrastructure projects under the
DPWH (34%). He also stated for the record that P24.5 million was allocated
per congressman per district albeit for specific projects only.
26


23. It should be noted that the appropriations for DOH, less the
realignments at the instance of the three senators, amount to nearly P10.5
million for each of the 289 Members of the House of Representatives.
27

Appropriations for DOLE and TESDA amount to nearly P3.5 million for each
House Member; for DSWD, P14 million; and CHED, also P14 million.

24. The said amounts are corroborated by a form
28
circulated among
House Members, after approval of the 2014 budget.

25. Pursuant to the said Special Provisions, the DSWD issued in
February 2014 Memorandum Circular No. 2,
29
the implementing guidelines for
the Crisis Intervention Program.
30
Wisely, it does not mention
congressman/woman and senator, nor indicate that he or she could have
a say in pinpointing the beneficiaries of the financial, medical transportation,
or burial assistance or any of the services under the program. Unwisely, the
memo was routed to the offices of all congressmen/women by DSWD
employees, who practically just tendered to congressional staff the memo
contained in an unmarked brown envelope.
31


26. Officials of the said agencies, including their Secretaries, also held
several meetings with legislators to orient the latter on how to access the
funds in these programs. One such meeting was conducted on 20 May 2014,
at the Andaya Hall, South Wing Building of the House of Representatives, by
Dr. Janette Garin, Undersecretary for the Women, Children, and Family Cluster
of the DOH.

26
Abad: PDAF realigned in 2014 budget, Corpuz, Nia, ABS-CBN News, 23 October 2013 (http://www.abs-
cbnnews.com/nation/10/23/13/abad-pdaf-realigned-2014-budget. Last accessed on 10 August 2014.)
27
At the time the 2014 GAA was passed.
28
Annex A.
29
Annex B.
30
Found in the 2014 GAA as part of the additional P4,090,769,000 given to DSWD (amount represents the
difference between the 2014 GAB approved by the House of Representatives and the 2014 GAB approved by
the bicameral conference committee).
31
Affidavit of Ms. Andrea Karla Guray, administrative staff of ACT Teachers Party-List Rep. Antonio Tinio.
Annex C.
12

27. Undersecretary Garin conducted the meeting upon a letter of
invitation to House Members to discuss the Medical Assistance Program.
32
It
was attended by a number of House Members and congressional staff.

28. The Medical Assistance Program is the program designed by DOH
to implement the abovementioned Special Provision 8 of the DOH budget in
the 2014 GAA, with appropriated funds amounting to over P3.1 billion.

29. Undersecretary Garin made a presentation on the guidelines then
recently signed by Secretary Enrique Ona for the Medical Assistance
Program,
33
using a slide presentation,
34
then entertained questions from the
audience. An audio recording of the meeting and a partial transcript are
attached to this Complaint.
35


30. The following are several things of note in the briefing:

a. Undersecretary Garin is there as representative of the DOH. She
also said that this whole program [MAP] was transferred to my office.

b. The DOH drafted the guidelines for the MAP in consultation with
the House Members, amending them three times. There was a lot of
confusion among the Members caused by lapses on the part of DOH,
because the guidelines that was given to you was in contrary to the
initial guidelines that I presented to the Speaker and the officers of the
House.

c. The DOH recognizes that the funds earmarked for the Medical
Assistance Program are not DOHs funds but the House Members,
36

with repeated references to the assistance fund for indigents being the
congressional fund and your funds,
37
and the guarantee letter as
tulong ni Congressman, tulong po ng opisina.

d. The DOH acknowledges the authority of the House Member to
identify indigent patients
38
and to determine whether persons will

32
Letter of invitation from the Office of the Undersecretary to Rep. Antonio L. TInio (Annex D).
33
Annex E, distributed during the briefing.
34
Annex F
35
Annexes G and H, respectively. The recording is authenticated by Mr. Romel Guisinga (Annex I).
36
USEC GARIN: So, the decision of the Department is to do away with all walk-in patients because in the
first place it was made clear to us that these funds are not DOH funds but are actually funds of Congressmen
who are there to assist their constituents.
37
On one occasion, Undersecretary Garin said, For the DOH-retained facilities, mali naman po talaga, lalo na
pag sinasabi nila na Uy, sorry po, wala po ditong pondo yung Congressman niyo. Hindi po talaga dapat
sabihin yun.
38
USEC GARIN: If in case nagpadala kayo ng pasyente, pagka-padala niyo ng pasyente, sinabi na Wala po
ditong pondo yung opisina niyo, which usually happens. This is something that we admit should not
happen but unfortunately the process of requesting the funds and downloading it takes a lot of time.
13

qualify as such.
39
Undersecretary Garin mentioned that the DOH in
certain instances can issue a guarantee letter (GL) for a person asking for
medical assistance with just one phone call from the House Member.
40

She also assured the audience that their referred patients are
guaranteed of assistanceWe will not let the patient wait. We will not
let your office wait.and that the GLs will be good as cashkumbaga
parang SM gift check.

e. The signed guidelines did away with documentary requirements
of proving ones qualification for the assistance.
41


f. The DOH has assigned focal persons to be on call for the
processing of guarantee letters from House Members, planning to install
at least three personnel so that there is someone to assist referred
patients 24/7. A list of focal persons per hospital was also distributed
by electronic mail the day after the briefing.
42
Undersecretary Garin also
said they have trained enough staff, and will add more in the future, to
accommodate the requests of all House Members.
43


g. There are three procedures for the implementation of the MAP.

i. For DOH-retained hospitals with downloaded funds:

39
USEC GARIN: Okay, so the qualifications will be a recommendation from the MAP officials, and who are
the MAP officials? Kayo yan, these are the Congressman or your designated personnel.
40
USEC GARIN: So, the proposal that we have in this case [when the funds have not yet downloaded to the
House Members chosen hospital] kung saka-sakaling pagdating [ng pasyente], wala diyaan, walang pondo
ung office or whatever, we have a directory that will be given to you and that will be e-mailed to all your
offices. In that directory, there are two persons in-charge of all hospitals, so makikita ninyo dun sa
directory, andidito yung mga pangalan ng mga hospitals and then kung sino yung contact person na
tatawagan ninyo. So, for any problem, you immediately call, text or e-mail the persons in-charge of that
hospital and automatically they will issue a guarantee letter direct to your office and direct to the hospital.
41
USEC GARIN: Now, on the implementing mechanism, we also learned that because it was going together
with PAU or the Public Assistance Unit of the Department of Health, nagkaroon ng maraming requirements so
on the provision of Medical Assistance there were requirements as to the original complete prescription for
medicines and medical supplies, the original laboratory request, the original physicians order request form
and the statement of account, all of this, so for your previous guidelines under Section 4 (B) that whole
paragraph has been deleted so we, the new guidelines that you have now, its totally deleted.
42
Electronic mail from the Public Assistance Unit to the Office of Rep. Tinio with the subject final directory
sent on May 21, 2014 (screenshot, Annex J). The e-mail contained a copy of the slide presentation and the list
of focal persons as attachments.
43
REP. SY-ALVARADO: Yun po bang ating available personnel in your office ho can accommodate all
congressmens concerns with regards to the sending of guarantee letters kasi po katulad lamang pos a aking
distrito po ay napakarami po na nabibigyan namin dati ng guarantee letter e kung minsan po animnapu,
minsan po isandaang pasyente x x x E kung kaming lahat e halos three hundred congressman kami, can they all
accommodate all of us po for that particular thing?
USEC GARIN: [W]hen this program came in and initially we thought it will be assigned to my office, we
trained people x x x Actually ni-retrieve namin yung lahat na trinain, we started calling them, we had a
meeting last week, dinagdagan ng tao, so makakayanan po nila. And ahm, if there will be a bottleneck at
some point of time, nagdadagdag po kami nang nagdadagdag ng tao. But for now, people who were
facilitating before thats a total of 6 or 7 people ahm, now they are 14 and 21. So yun po situation po. For
sure they can accommodate everybody.
14

- The hospitals provides the medical assistance upon request
made directly by the House Member to the hospital
ii. For DOH-retained hospitals without downloaded funds:
- Requests are made to the MAP unit, which issues a
guarantee letter to the patient. The GL is presented to the
hospital cashier, which then provides assistance on behalf of the
hospital. A bill is sent to the MAP Unit for verification and
payment.
iii. For non-DOH government health facilities:
- Same for DOH-retained hospitals without downloaded
funds.

h. Names of DOH officials are deleted in the GL in recognition of the
political points.
44
The signatory in the old GL, Assistant Secretary
Jimmy Lagajid, was removed so that there will be no doubt in the minds
of beneficiaries as to who facilitated the funds,
45
i.e., the House
Representative.

i. The DOH has now banned from receiving the assistance walk-in
patients who go straight to hospitals without going to a congressman or
congresswomans district office first.
46


j. The Undersecretary also mentioned that any excess from the GLs
can be used for take-home medicines.
47


44
USEC GARIN: We also understand na yung guarantee letter na unang nirelease, medyo yung format, I
mean its good, its okay. Unfortunately, the format creates a lot of questions kasi nga parang its, its an
indigency program of the DOH. Nawawalan ngayon ng, let`s admit it, the political points in, in the case of
the office requesting it kasi ang nakapirma dun is Asec. Lagajid and it was placed there na hindi pwedeng i-
honor pag Saturday and Sunday. Andudun din yung nakalagay na its charged in the office of the Secretary.
So all of these were deleted. We will be giving you the new format of the guarantee letter.
45
USEC GARIN: Tinanggal na rin namin yung pumipirma, si ASec Jimmy Lagaji. ASec Jimmy is, kaya siya
nandiyadiyan before, kasi siya yung head ng PAU Office and he is the HEA of Secretary Ona. We also admit na
hindi nga maganda tingnan na meron ibibigay kayo tapos makikita ng pasyente na ASec Lagajid kasi
nawawalan ngayon ng points na totoo naman na kayo ang nag-facilitate ng pondo.
46
USEC GARIN: Ito palang dalawang forms [from the PAU] because its a PAU or a Public Assistance Unit
Office, yung isang form na pinapadala sa inyo parang yung mga walk-in patient na gustong magpatulong.
The PAU office writes a recommendation and sends it to your office. So medyo hindi maganda kasi parang ang
feeling tuloy ng pasyente nagpunta siya sa DOH, ngayon itutulak namin sa office ninyo. Pag hindi agad na-
entertain ng office ninyo, marami pang salita. So the decision of the department is to do away with all walk-
in patients because in the first place it was made clear to us that these funds are not DOH funds but are
actually funds of Congressmen who are there to assist their constituents. So the referral letter if ever you
receive one coming from DOH, dont mind that but we already gave instruction. I mean I personally gave
instructions last week to do away with all of those. Kasi hindi pi-puwedeng yung mga kapag may lumalapit
dun ire-refer namin sa inyo. You know best and you know better sino ang nanganagilangan ng tulong sa
distrito ninyo. Isa pa, hindi rin talaga namin alam kung constituent ninyo because they can always say theyre
from this district, theyre from this area tapos hindi naman.
47
USEC GARIN: Now, meron ding mga tanong yung billing amount daw, hindi nagko-coincide sa requested
amount sa guarantee letter. We already gave instructions for the hospitals, kung kunwari ang pinabigay
ninyong tulong is four thousand or lets say five thousand. Yung billing niya kasi nabawasan pa pala ng
Philhealth or whatever naging lets say three thousand five hundred na lang para hindi na tumagal, pakuha
ninyo na lang ng take-home meds niya. Kasi meron namang mga gamot din na inuuwi sa bahay so pakuha na
lang dun. Idadagdag na lang nila sa bill yun. The hospital wouldnt mind as long as the amount stipulated in
15

k. Since the 2014 GAA states that the funds are for medical
assistance only, medical missions are not allowed. The Undersecretary
then suggested ways of going around the prohibition. She also
suggested for Congress to include medical missions in the enabling SP
for the DOH funds in the 2015 budget.
48


l. That issuances and instructions are released to offices and
hospitals of DOH to implement the MAP in accordance to the above.

31. During the open forum, mechanisms used by the DSWD for its
House pork were revealed by a House Member who said that he was able to
talk to Secretary Dinky [Corazon Soliman]. According to him, DSWDs
assistance fund is identified by the local government unit chosen by the
legislator:

Ang napagkasunduan doon namin regarding yung situations like us na
malayo kami sa regional office, malayo kami sa mga regional hospitals or
national agencies e ida-download po nila, meron na po silang ginawang MOA
from the Central Office pipirma yung regional director ng DSWD at ida-
download po yung pondo, lets say 12 million. Sabi ni Secretary, Cong, kahit
kalahati lang muna kasi masyadong malaki. So yung kalahati po ida-
download lang sa local government na gusto mo na mag-iimplement ng
programa ng DSWD at yung provincial government na yun, it will be signed
by the governor and the regional director of the Department. Yung pondo
na yun, ang responsible na po ay yung LGU.

32. On 13 February 2014, the Philippine Information Agency (PIA)
Region XII issued a press release entitled DOLE 12, solons partner for
employment, government internship projects. It states that, together with
the Department of Labor and Employment-Region XII, the eight congressional
representatives of Region XIII are setting up plans for the implementation of
programs and activities for funds coursed through the agency.

33. DOLE Regional Director Ofelia Domingo confirmed the P3.5-
million allotment per congressional district for beneficiaries to be identified by
the congressmen under the Tulong Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged
Workers or the TUPAD program and the Government Internship Program.

the guarantee letter will be the amount will be the amount that the hospital will honor. If the bill is like five
thousand and the guarantee letter is four thousand five hundred then they have to pay for the 500 kasi medyo
mahirap silang i-ano...
48
USEC. GARIN: Ay just lastlast concern pala. Ang daming tumatawag tungkol sa procurement of
medicines. While we would like to support that, our dilemma is that our hands are tied because in the funds
that were approved, naka-specify kasi siya na hospital assistance. May we just request na kung pu-pwede for
the next year, specified dun na puwede yung procurement of medicines for medical missions because as of
now, DBM does not allow usSo yun naman yung medyo dilemma namin but then if you have medical
missions, these are like out-patient, you can group them together like oh you can have a diabetes clinic or
you can have a hypertensive clinic and then the laboratories and the medicines that they will be using can
be charged to the hospital. So, pu-pwede po yung ganun.
16

Domingo also cited that she met with the solons in early January to inform
the latter of the availability of the said budget and set the initial steps for the
required work plan.

34. It will be recalled that TUPAD and GIP have been provided with
appropriations amounting to P1.02 billion as per Special Provision 8 of the
DOLE budget in the 2014 GAA. The abovementioned allocation of P3.5 million
per congressional district are to be funded from this appropriation.

35. A copy of this article as it appeared in the website of the PIA
Region XII is attached to this Complaint as Annex K.
49


36. Other reports from the DOLE Regions X
50
and V
51
also confirm the
P3.5-million allocation per district reflected in the form circulated after the
approval of the 2014 GAA. These reports from official sources indicate that
the DOLE Regional Offices recognize the entitlement of district representatives
to pinpoint beneficiaries for the GIP and TUPAD Program. The press release
for DOLE X approved for release by Regional Director Atty. Alan M. Macaraya
said that Interested applicants are advised to visit their respective
Congressional Districts Offices.

37. On 22 April 2014, lists of focal persons for DOH, DOLE, and CHED
were provided by the Office of the Speaker to House Members.
52
The lists
contain the names and contact numbers of (1) assigned staff in each of the 136
covered hospitals for the MHCAP, (2) focal persons for the GIP and TUPAD
programs of DOLE, and (3) CHED regional directors for its scholarship
program.
53


38. On 4 August 2014, the House Committee on Appropriations
conducted a hearing on the CHEDs implementation of their scholarship
programs as mandated in Special Provision 3 of the CHED budget in the 2014
GAA, with appropriations amounting to P4.1 billion. According to Chairperson
Isidro Ungab, the hearing is an oversight committee hearing x x x We can act
as an oversight body especially for x x x public funds.

39. The meeting was not announced in general as is usually done
following the Rules of the House. Neither were the regular and ex-officio
members of the Committee on Appropriations given notice that it will be held

49
Taken from http://r12.pia.gov.ph/index.php?article=1611392260408. Last accessed on 10 August 2014.
50
A copy of this article is attached to this complaint as Annex L. Taken from
http://ro10.dole.gov.ph/default.php?retsamlakygee=356&resource=cfe6055d2e0503be378bb63449ec7ba6.
Last accessed on 10 August 2014.
51
A copy of this article is attached to this complaint as Annex M. http://www.bicolmail.com/2012/?p=13798.
Last accessed on 10 August 2014.
52
Affidavit of Ms. Guray, Note 31.
53
Annex A of the affidavit of Ms. Guray.
17

on that day and its agenda. Rep. Tinio was informed of the same only by
chance, when he heard a fellow congressman mention it at a hearing of
another committee, and was thus able to attend it.

40. A member of Tinios staff also attended the hearing and made an
audio recording of a portion of the proceedings.
54


41. Present during the hearing were Chairperson Patricia Licuanan
and Director Isabel Inlayo from the CHED, Director Cristy Clasara from the
DBM, and State Auditor Julieta Escao and Director Sofia Gemora from the
Commission on Audit (COA), as well as staff of these departments together
with House Members and their staff.

42. During the hearing, some disgruntled legislators present made
Chairperson Licuanan explain why their lists of recommended scholars were
not being funded by CHED.

43. From the answers of Chairperson Licuanan, it was clear that she
knew that due to the Decision, legislators are now prohibited from taking part
in the implementation of CHEDs scholarship programs, like they did under the
PDAF system.
55
She explained that the COA on December 2013 issued the
agency a negative audit observation.
56


44. Chairperson Licuanan acknowledged said that due to the Supreme
Court decision on PDAF, some of the Regional Directors treated the P14 million
allocation-per district as additional scholarships that they could award to
qualified applicants from the general public. Pertaining to the earmarked
funds from the realigned PDAF, Chairperson Licuanan said that We told them
[the Regional Directors] what the restrictions were. That actually, this is not
true, you do not have P14 million per district na extra. This will really be for
the congressmen.

45. Chairperson Licuanan also explained that CHED publicized that
there are available scholarship slots, and thus opened the P4.1 billion-worth of
scholarships to all applicantsbut assured the legislators that CHED would
give priority to the list of beneficiaries submitted by lawmakers:

54
Audio recording of the hearing (Annex N), attested by affidavit of Atty. Maneeka Asistol Sarza, Legislative
Staff of Rep. Antonio L. Tinio (Annex O), with a transcript of the recording (Annex P).
55
SEC. LICUANAN: I know I dont have the refinements of whether its oversight or whatever but the
fact is, my understanding is that, well you used the term earlier, illegal post intervention. So in other
words, you make the law, you dont implement it.
56
SEC. LICUANAN: We have a previous encounter with the Commission on Audit. They had a very
serious audit observation levelled to us, report to us that essentially, the way we were handling some of the
PDAF that came to us as well as the congressional scholarships we give out was different from our usual
scholarships which follow the same set of CHED guidelines.
That was even before PDAF became an issue. We said, all right, in which case, we will make sure
that the same guidelines prevail for all the scholarships that we handle, including the congressional ones.
18


So that was what we were doing. But the system, I guess, take time. x x x
Thats [the public announcement of available scholarship slots] our duty.
We had a lot of grants, we have to make this public. But in our adjustments
already internally, we said that priority would be given to the
recommendedthe listahan of the congressmen.
x x x
Finally, I had to say, Okay, people, this is the way it has to be. I know this
was supposed to be illegal. Dapat wala na, but actually, meron pa.

46. The Secretary added, I am alsoaccepting the political reality
that this is PDAF.

47. From these facts, Aquinos impeachable offenses of betrayal of
public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution are evident.


FIRST IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE:
BETRAYAL OF PUBLIC TRUST

Aquino betrayed the public trust by perpetuating congressional pork through
informal practices in defiance of the ruling of the Supreme Court, to the
detriment of public interest

Aquino also betrayed the public trust by breaking his oath that he will
faithfully and conscientiously fulfil his duties as President and preserve and
defend the Constitution, execute our laws, and do justice to every person


Betrayal of public trust

48. On 30 June 2010, Aquino swore to all Filipinos thus:

Ako si Benigno Aquino III. Matimtim kong pinanunumpaan na tutuparin ko
nang buong katapatan at sigasig ang aking mga tungkulin bilang Pangulo ng
Pilipinas, pangangalagaan at ipagtatanggol ang kanyang Konstitusyon,
ipatutupad ang mga batas nito, magiging makatarungan sa bawat tao, at
itatalaga ang aking sarili sa paglilingkod sa Bansa. Kasihan nawa ako ng
Diyos.
57


49. The SC has defined betrayal of public trust as acts which are
just short of being criminal but constitute gross faithlessness against public
trust, tyrannical abuse of power, inexcusable negligence of duty, favoritism,
and gross exercise of discretionary powers.
58
They need not amount to

57
Seksyon 5, Artikulo VII, Saligang Batas ng Republika ng Pilipinas.
58
Gonzales v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 196231, 4 September 2012
19

criminal offenses, but their commission proves that the public officer is unable
to comply with his or her oath of office and refuses to serve the people.

50. According to the SC, the ground is broad enough to cover any
violation of the oath of office,
59
unless the same is attended by human error
and good faith.
60


51. The framers of the Constitution gave examples of acts constituting
betrayal of public trust, namely, betrayal of public interest, inexcusable
negligence of duty, tyrannical abuse of power, breach of official duty by
malfeasance or misfeasance, cronyism, and favoritism, among others. By the
manner and degree that they are committed, these acts prejudice public
interest and tend to bring the office into disrepute.
61


52. By perpetuating congressional pork through informal practices in
defiance of the ruling of the Supreme Court, Aquino violated his oath of office
and betrayed public trust through wilful breach of official duty by malfeasance.

53. This offense to the people is compounded or made graver by his
act of deceiving the public, whom he led into believing that he will comply with
the law against congressional pork and eliminate it once and for all, while
secretly perpetuating it through informal arrangements between Congress and
the departments under his command.

54. He knowingly, deliberately violates the Decision, which has the
force and effect of a law enacted by Congress, by authorizing his Cabinet
secretaries who head the agencies handling the funds formerly known as PDAF
to set up informal practices enabling House Members to intervene, assume, or
participate in the implementation of certain programs, including the exercise
of discretion in the use of agency funds, during the budget execution stage.

55. Specifically, these programs are:

a. Assistance to Indigent Patients of the DOH,

59
Gonzales citing the Proceedings of the 1986 Constitutional Commission:
MR. REGALADO: [T]his is with respect to Section 2, on the grounds for impeachment, and I quote:
culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, other high crimes, graft and corruption or
betrayal of public trust.
Just for the record, what would the Committee envision as a betrayal of the public trust which is not
otherwise covered by the other terms antecedent thereto?
MR. ROMULO: I think, if I may speak for the Committee and subject to further comments of
Commissioner de los Reyes [the proponent of the addition of betrayal of public trust as a ground], the
concept is that this is a catch-all phrase. Really, it refers to his oath of office, in the end that the idea of
a public trust is connected with the oath of office of the officer, and if he violates that oath of office,
then he has betrayed that trust.
60
Gonzales.
61
Proceedings of the 1986 Constitutional Commission. Commissioner De los Reyes
20

b. Government Internship Program (GIP) and Tulong
Panghanapbuhay sa Ating Disadvantaged Workers TUPAD
Project of the DOLE,
c. Special Training for Employment Program of TESDA,
d. Crisis Intervention Program of the DSWD, and
e. Scholarship Program of the CHED.

56. Based on implementing guidelines subsequently issued by the
DOH, the Assistance to Indigent Patients is being implemented as the Medical
Health Care Assistance Program
62
or, as Undersecretary Garin refers to it, the
Medical Assistance Program.
63


57. In the case of CHED, its scholarship program is essentially being
implemented as the Special Study Grant Program for Congressional
Districts.
64



Hidden congressional pork

58. The prohibited intervention of House Members in the
implementation of these programs include the post-enactment identification
of localities, hospitals, and schools in the case of DOH, CHED, and TESDA funds;
the assignment of amounts that will be earmarked for and downloaded to
each; and the identification of beneficiaries and the amount of financial
assistance to be extended to them.

59. This system is no different from the system of soft projects and
their manner of implementation under the outlawed PDAF.

60. However, the whole system under the old PDAF is in black and
whiteembodied in the Special Provisions for the PDAF item in the GAA,
administrative issuances from the DBM and the implementing agencies, and
memoranda of agreement between House Members and implementing
agencies.

61. With the Belgica Decision, these written or formal practices have
now been prohibited. The PDAF item and any reference to it are not found in
the 2014 GAA; neither can they be seen in the guidelines issued by the six
mentioned agencies to implement their respective programs.


62
Note 34.
63
USEC. GARIN: So first and foremost in behalf of the Department of Health, allow me to apologize for all
the chaos and confusions that the Medical Assistance Program has created.
64
As mentioned by Region X. See Note 63.
21

62. However, the SC foresaw that it will be possible to perpetuate the
PDAF through informal practices, and thus likewise prohibited all informal
practices of similar import and effectmeaning, even unwritten practices by
which lawmakers are allowed to participate in any manner in the
implementation of these programs. These practices will be difficult to
document as they leave no paper trail explicitly acknowledging the entitlement
of legislators to these funds and their role in the implementation of the
programs.

63. Informal practices in the PDAF and PDAF-like schemes necessarily
require the cooperation between the department and the legislator. It will be
necessary, then, to establish the linkages between them and the protocols
they use in the course of this unlawful cooperation.

64. Such linkages and protocols are sufficiently described in (1) the
hearing of the House Committee on Appropriations on the CHEDs
implementation of its scholarship programs, (2) the briefing by Undersecretary
Garin with House Members and their staff, both conducted within the very
grounds of the House of Representatives, and (3) the public statements of the
Regional Directors of DOLE.


As admitted and acknowledged by Aquinos cabinet
secretaries and other executive officials, the
congressional pork barrel continues to exist despite the
ruling against it

65. Aquino, after the Decision announced to the public, through his
communications secretary, that his administration will comply with the
decision of the Supreme Court (SC) declaring the Priority Development
Assistance Fund (PDAF) unconstitutional. From the very words of the
announcement, plus (1) the fact that his administration did not move for the
reconsideration of the ruling and (2) his earlier announcement that it is time
to abolish the PDAF, Aquino had no purpose other than to mislead the public
into believing that they have seen the last of congressional pork barrel.

66. However, congressional pork is really not gone but has merely
gone into hiding, with the full knowledge and under the instructions of Aquino.
This is evident from the admissions of his cabinet secretaries and regional
directors of at least three agencies to which the House pork was realigned.

67. Faced with the negative COA observation and the Belgica
Decision, Chairperson Licuanan admitted during the Appropriations
Committee hearing that CHED had to go through the motions of publicly
announcing the availability of scholarship slots and applying their general
22

guidelines on scholarships, but to her, the entitlement of lawmakers to name
the scholars remainBut in our adjustments already internally, we said that
priority would be given to the recommendedthe listahan of the
congressmen. Most telling are her following statements:

a. I know this [giving priority to lawmakers lists of referred
scholars] was supposed to be illegal. Dapat wala na, but actually,
meron pa.

b. I am also accepting the political reality that this is PDAF.

68. For her part, Undersecretary Garin clearly stated that the P3.2
billion MAP funds for medical assistance are the funds of lawmakers:

So the decision of the Department is to do away with all walk-in
patients because in the first place it was made clear to us that these
funds are not DOH funds but are actually funds of Congressmen who
are there to assist their constituents.

69. Additionally, she made it clear that it is the lawmakers who will
identify the beneficiaries of medical assistance: Okay, so the qualifications
will be a recommendation from the MAP officials, and who are the MAP
officials? Kayo yan, these are the Congressman or your designated
personnel.

70. The Regional Director of DOLE-XII, admitted in her press release
that DOLE-XII is implementing the GIP and TUPAD programs in close
coordination with the eight congressional representatives of her region, even
to the point of inviting the latter to prepare their work plans which will be
the basis for the release of funds. In the case of

71. Considering the scope and significance of the mechanisms
described, the admissions of these officials from three agencies under
Aquinos watch betray the Executive BranchsAquinosdesign to institute
systems that allows the treatment of funds under its management as the
lawmakers, to be disbursed per these politicians discretion and not the
agencies.


As admitted and acknowledged by Aquinos cabinet
secretaries and other executive officials, the agencies
handling the House pork still set aside personal lump
sums for House Members which they can tap and
disburse according to their discretion

23

72. Also admitted were the specific earmarked amounts which were
tucked into the five agencies after the realignment of PDAF. From the forum
conducted by Undersecretary Garin, the closed-door meeting of the
Committee on Appropriations with Secretary Licuanan, and the press
statements issued by the three DOLE Regions, the amounts of House pork
handled by DOH, CHED, and DOLE, are proven to be P3.19 billion, P4.1 billion,
and P1.02 billion, respectively. Also admitted are the allocations of each
House Member: P10.5 million, P14 million, and P3.5 million, respectively.

73. As shown by the meetings and public statements, the
implementing agencies consider these per-district allocations as personal lump
sums of each legislatora lawmaker recommends or refers beneficiaries to
the agencies, and the latter is bound by such recommendation and referral.

74. Chairperson Licuanan admitted that she informed her Regional
Directors of the restrictions against legislators naming the scholars post-GAA,
But actually, this is not true, you do not have P14 million per district na
extra. This will really be for the congressmen.

75. We had a lot of grants, we have to make this public. But in our
adjustments already internally, we said that priority would be given to the
recommendedthe listahan of the congressmen.

76. Undersecretary Garin also proved this entitlement granted to the
legislators:

a. Okay, so the qualifications will be a recommendation from the
MAP officials, and who are the MAP officials? Kayo yan, these are the
Congressman or your designated personnel.

b. We have a directory that will be given to you and that will be e-
mailed to all your offices. In that directory, there are two persons in-
charge of all hospitals, so makikita ninyo dun sa directory, andidito yung
mga pangalan ng mga hospitals and then kung sino yung contact person
na tatawagan ninyo. So, for any problem, you immediately call, text or
e-mail the persons in-charge of that hospital and automatically they
will issue a guarantee letter direct to your office and direct to the
hospital.

c. We will not let the patient wait. We will not let your office wait.

77. DOLE-XII Regional Director Domingo stated, The decision as to
how much the legislators would allocate for emergency funds and the
Government Internship Program (GIP) depends on the congressional
representative. This, after she held a meeting with the eight legislators in
24

SOCCKSARGEN or their representatives to inform the latter of the availability
of the said budget. Per the approved announcement of DOLE-X Regional
Director Atty. Alan M. Macaraya, Interested applicants are advised to visit
their respective Congressional Districts Offices.


Aquinos cabinet secretaries and other executive
officials demonstrated that they have put in place
procedures and mobilized a significant amount of
personnel and resources to enable lawmakers to
exercise illegal post-enactment authority over the
programs funded by the House pork

78. The meetings with Secretary Licuanan
65
and Undersecretary
Garin
66
detail the procedures by which their executive agencies allow the
exercise by legislators of post-enactment authority beyond oversight. These
procedures are enabled through the mobilization of a significant amount of
personnel and resources. The public statements of the Regional Directors
67

that they involved solons in the formulation of work plans for the GIP and
TUPAD Programs and their advice to applicants to visit the district offices of
these solons are glaring official admissions of this fact.

79. The mechanisms for CHED essentially consist of its regional offices
ostensibly following the general guidelines for all scholarship programs but,
following internal adjustments, priority would be given to the
recommendedthe listahan of the congressmen.

80. For DOH, the mechanisms involve tremendous resources of the
agency, including personnel in 136 covered hospitals who are on call 24/7 to
automatically issue guarantee letters (which are good as cash) to patients
referred by lawmakers.

81. For DOLE, the mechanisms consist of the granting of slots for
emergency employment or government internship in accordance with the
work plans set up by the solons.

82. For DSWD, it was shown that Secretary Dinky Soliman herself has
made arrangements with at least one solon to allow him to identify the local
governments where the assistance funds will be distributed. This also shows
that the DILG is also in on the informal schemes allowing illegal post-
enactment intervention.


65
Paragraphs 44 to 46 of this Complaint.
66
Paragraphs 30 to 31 of this Complaint.
67
Paragraphs 32 to 33 of this Complaint.
25

83. The innocuous identification by legislators of beneficiaries prior to
the enactment of the 2014 GAA, granting but not conceding that they indeed
occurred pre-GAA, inevitably extends to the prohibited meddling of individual
lawmakers into the functions of the implementing agency post-GAA.

84. The totality of these circumstances show a grand designacross
executive agencies, relating to billions of public monies, and involving at least
seven top members of Aquinos cabinet
68
which cannot possibly occur
without the knowledge and license of Aquino. This grand design consists of
the Executive Branch bending over backwards to allow congressional pork
barrel to live on through hidden meanssomething already prohibited by the
law as pronounced by the Supreme Court.


The mechanisms admitted by Aquinos alter egos and
subordinates are necessarily informalto conceal from
the public the persistence of congressional pork barrel
and the fact that the Chief Executive is subverting the
law and public institutions

85. In the case of CHED, it is the Chairperson of the agency herself
the alter ego of the Presidentwho demonstrated awareness of the political
reality that this is PDAF, retaining all the infirmities of the old, written system
where legislators identify who should receive the funds, to be handed out
according to this legislators list regardless of the qualifications set by CHEDs
guidelines.

86. Also part of the prohibited informal practices is the unwritten
understanding (that is, not in the 2014 GAA, the guidelines, or any of the
issuances of CHED) that each House Member has specific earmarked amounts
that can be distributed in the form of scholarships, medical or financial
assistance, internships, and emergency employment.

87. These informal practices are evidence of Aquinos bad faith. Any
governmental act, especially one involving billions of public funds, should have
a basis and/or proof in writing, considering the state policy of transparency in
the management of public resources and accountability of public officers.
Nowhere in the guidelines governing the implementation of the MHCAP, for
instance, is there an indication that an indigent patient is one who has walked
into a solons office first before walking into the hospital, or that medical
assistance will be surely be issued upon the recommendation of a legislator.
The guidelines for CHEDs scholarships have even removed any apparent trace
of the old Congressional Special Study Grant Program, and yet, priority is still

68
The five agencies plus DBM and DILG.
26

being given to the listahan of the congressmen, following CHEDs internal
adjustments.

88. The culture of recommendation and referral is still occurring
within executive agencies handling House pork despite the absence of written
grounds for it. Indeed, there will be no written grounds for it. The Executive
Branch is hiding the pork from the public whom he has misled into believing
Aquino when he said Panahon na po upang i-abolish ang PDAF.

89. Informal practices of dealing with pork do continue to exist in
post-PDAF times, like the informal practices relating to PDAF have persisted
and been constantly observed throughout the years.
69


90. As the news reports and official government sources above prove,
these concealed practices cannot help but surface, the conspiracy to
perpetuate a noxious system mutually beneficial to fellow pork-holders and
influence-peddlers cannot be kept hidden. Even hidden under the cloak of
executive secrecy, public officials such as Members of the House of
Representatives, state auditors, even one of the secretaries handling the
implementation of funds which turn out to be still pork will surely come out in
the open and express their opposition to pork and its inevitable expenditure
for political patronage and matters other than public purposes.


With his perpetuation of these informal practices,
Aquino is the mastermind behind hidden congressional
pork, and is forcing the entire bureaucracy of the
involved agencies to implement illegal acts

91. As stated above, Chairperson Licuanan is the alter ego of the
President for CHED. Her knowledge of the persistence of PDAF, although in
another form, and her agencys actions in implementing scholarship programs,
are likewise the knowledge and actions of Aquino, her principal. The actions of
Undersecretary Garin, as they concern affairs with the Congress and relate to
billions of pesos in public funds and a major program in which grand resources
and personnel of the DOH are mobilized, are also the actions of Aquino.

92. Aquinos other alter ego, his budget chief Secretary Abad, defends
the realignments of legislators and their duty to recommend. In addition
to the totality of circumstances already detailed, this pig-headed defense of
congressional pork shows that Aquino is (1) fully aware that the legislators
post-enactment authority or their entitlement to particular earmarked funds
prohibited by the Decision is alive and oinking in the post-PDAF budget and (2)

69
The Decision, page 43.
27

also fully aware of, if not endorsing, the outlawed informal practices going on
within his Cabinet. These circumstances are not coincidental but reflect a
common, overarching policy to retain a system already outlawed by the SC.

93. In the midst of all these, Aquino has never issued a categorical
directive or mere statement confirming the Decision as to the outlawed
participation of lawmakers in program or project implementation and that he
will brook no violation of this law under any of the agencies under his
leadership on the national and local levels.

94. The statements and acts, including the how-to-access meetings,
are ascribed to the heads of agenciesthat is, members of his cabinet and his
alter egostheir local alterns, and legislators who are members of his Liberal
Party and its coalition. Secondly, these are not incidents isolated in one
agency or locality but well-reported, even by Aquinos own PIA, to be occurring
as an open secret in all the agencies above and in the provinces and regions.

95. Being the Chief Executive, no major policy is implemented in the
departments, bureaus, and offices he headsespecially one that is universal
to those given the realigned funds and involving a significant amount of public
fundswithout his knowledge and consent.

96. At the very least, the take-care clause makes it Aquinos duty to
exercise the greatest diligence to ensure that inviting and allowing legislators
to refer and recommend projects and beneficiaries in any manner beyond
their limited role of oversight do not occur. His denial, therefore, of these
informal practices in the face of indisputable reports, granting for the sake of
argument that he really does not know what is going on in his agencies, is an
admission of negligence in the performance of his duties.

97. While Aquinos cabinet secretaries are the chief implementors of
hidden congressional pork, those in the entire bureaucracy down to the
smallest government employee tasked to secure the secrecy of a purported
closed door meeting or assigned as a hospital assigned staff or focal
person for scholarships and internship are forced to commit illegal acts. These
rank-and-file officials are under orders to allow legislators to name
beneficiaries of programs, long after their role as legislators is done. They are
turned into instruments with which Aquino can flout the law.


By perpetuating congressional pork through informal
practices, Aquino prejudices the public interest

98. The SC through the Decision has prohibited congressional pork
barrel in whatever name and form for being abhorrent to separation of
28

powers, non-delegability of legislative power, the Presidents veto power,
public accountability, and genuine local autonomy. It also echoed the peoples
observation that the President and Congress are happily scratching each
others back in the pork barrel system, damaging the public interest in the
process. This damage is well known to the public.

99. Well documentedand an open secretis the nature of
congressional pork as largesse distributed by the President to lawmakers,
either to secure their cooperation especially for the executives pet bills, or
protect him or her from impeachment. Aquinos immediate successor, Gloria
Macapagal Arroyo, used pork as well as other perks to thwart five
impeachment complaints against her since 2005 over strong charges of
electoral fraud and other constitutional violations, even as she consistently
denied it to progressive legislators critical to her, especially those who
supported her impeachment.
70


100. As congressional pork is the grease that turns the wheels of
Congress in the direction dictated by the President, so it is also the grease that
allows accountability for irregularities to slough off from the executive branch,
especially its chief. Under the pork barrel system, legislators, individually or
collectively, intrude into the implementation of projects and programswhich
should be the sole province of the executive branch. This intrusion in turn
impairs the objectivity of the legislators whose duties as members of
congress include overseeing whether the projects and programs are being
implemented properly, or at all, by the executive branch. This dilution, even
defeat, of the checks and balances system is well articulated in the Decision.

101. From the meetings with Secretary Licuanan and Undersecretary
Garin, the evils sought to be prevented by the prohibition against PDAF are still
present with the perpetuation of Aquinos PDAF-like schemes for the hidden
congressional pork.

102. The protocols in the MAP as described by Garin to legislators
amply demonstrate how the system of checks and balancesa mechanism
that gives life to the Constitutional provision of accountability of public
officersis dissolved. First, her audience and the ones who aided in the
drafting of the MAP guidelines are those who are duty-bound to check her
Department in its implementation of the funds, investigating whenever
necessary whether taxpayers money are properly and efficiently spent. As
the SC said in its Decision, Congress cannot be expected to exercise its
oversight function objectively, or at all, if its Members were part of the
program to be investigated.
71


70
CenPEG, Note 7.
71
The Decision, pages 51-52.
29


103. The SC added, [A]llowing legislators to intervene in the various
phases of project implementationa matter before another office of
governmentrenders them susceptible to taking undue advantage of their
own office.
72
Indeed, allowing legislators to approve guidelines for the
distribution of what the DOLE deems are not DOH funds but are actually
funds of Congressmen and giving them power to say who exactly should get
these funds, renders them susceptible to taking advantage of their power.

104. The second way in congressional pork destroys the system of
exacting the accountability of public officials is seen in the deletion in the
guidelines of standards that would at least ensure that public funds are not
given to just anybody, especially those who should not qualify for an
assistance were it not for the endorsement of the House Member. DOH has
waived several documentary evidence previously required under the PDAF like
original complete prescriptions for medicines and medical supplies, laboratory
requests, physicians order request forms, and statements of account, which
would have ensured that the funds will go to those who really need them, not
to a Napoles-type individual or a fake NGO.

105. The hearing with Secretary Licuanan shows that CHEDs
guidelines on scholarships are being reduced to lip service, if not completely
erased, with the priority status accorded to the listahan of the
congressmen. These guidelines, such as those with regard to priority courses
or the requirement to submit lists of actual scholars prior to downloading of
funds to the higher education institutions, are safeguards that would ensure
that the public funds appropriated for scholarships will indeed go to
scholarships, and not for other purposes, including political accommodation
and patronage. As aptly observed by one daily, In the first place, the primary
reason for the abolition of the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF)
was to safeguard public funds by ensuring that it is used entirely for the
welfare of the people and not for the benefit of legislators.
73


106. But the deeper injury caused by congressional pork, like any
other kind of pork, lies in the denial of equal access of the people to basic
social services. This happens in either of two ways.

107. First refers to the culture of referral and recommendation
coming from politicians so ingrained in our society through decades of the
pork barrel system. Due to this practice, only persons who carry guarantee
letters or referrals can afford a medical check-up or procedure, or enrol in

72
Ibid, page 52
73
CHEDs priority courses for scholarship grantees, Catanduanes Tribune, 3 May 2014.
http://www.catanduanestribune.com/article/3R1P. Last accessed on 10 August 2014.
30

college, or receive employment assistance. Those unlucky enough not to have
these golden tickets given by politicians will have to forego going to the clinic
or a higher education. Instead of enjoying services which are supposed to be
theirs for the taking as a matter of right, the people under pork have to
knock on the doors of politicians to seek patronage or influence before they
could they avail of these servicesas matter of privilege.

108. The MAP guidelines have even strengthened this culture.
Whereas under the PDAF, guarantee letters are required, a hospital under the
MAP guidelines can even issue a guarantee letter to a person with just one
call of the House Member in case the funds have not yet been downloaded
to the his or her chosen hospital. Also under MAP, patients referred by
politicians are guaranteed of assistanceWe will not let the patient wait.
We will not let your office wait, said Undersecretary Garin on behalf of the
DOH.

109. Worse, walk-ins in government hospitals, or those who went
straight to the hospital without first securing a guarantee letter, are
disallowed. It is the politician who has the power to determine if a patient is
worthy of assistancenot the needs of the patient, not the social workers
and doctors and other medical personnel who have the competence to
determine these needs.

110. Under this hidden, worsened congressional pork, what should be
right of everyone is now seen as a privilege. Under this system already
banned by the highest court of the land, people who get sick should not call
the doctorthey should call a politician. Those who cannot fully afford a
college education, at their young age, are taught that they need to seek
powerful patrons first before they can continue their studies. The same goes
for the unemployed before they can get ease their joblessness and earn
income while in between jobs.

111. Under this hidden, worsened congressional pork being
perpetuated by Aquino, the delivery of basic public services such as
education, health care, social welfare, and employment assistance is
politicized. The politicization of services denies access to the majority of the
Filipino people who have neither the means nor the clout to go to the district
offices of legislators or the House of Representatives in Quezon City. This is
the evil when we course the delivery of basic social services to politicians.

112. There is a second manner in which equal access of the people to
basic social services is denied. The practice of putting gigantic lump sums
(which the SC said to have fattened through 23 years at least 12 times
74
)

74
From P2.3 billion in 1990 to P24.79 billion in 2013. The Decision, page 17.
31

which are to be disbursed per the discretion of a sole or a few individual
officials have consistently denied the people of genuine and longer-term
investments for services and infrastructure for their welfare. The people
under pork have been forced to forgo 12,500 classrooms which could have
been built with the P10 billion PDAF pocketed by Napoles, her political
cohorts, and fake NGOs, and lost P74.3 billionthe total PDAF budgeted by
the Aquino administration
75
that could have more than adequately equipped
and sustained schools, hospitals, and other public infrastructure, and spent for
job creation.

113. It should be noted that the peoplethe victims of porkdemand
for the abolition of the pork barrel system because it deprives them of basic
social services even as it leaves the government open for those who wish to
exploit its resources for personal use, including political patronage. Aquino
and his subalterns spit in the face of this public sentiment by using the
people as scapegoats in their argument for the necessity of the culture of
patronage central to pork:

Interviewed in the House of Representatives, Abad said it is still the
legislators duty to attend to their constituents needs even if they no longer
have the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) to fund it.

Theres nothing wrong if legislators recommend projects kasi trabaho nila
yan, Abad said. Otherwise, magagalit ang constituents nila.

x x x

Abad said lawmakers had to retain the privilege of lobbying with
government agencies because they have constituents they need to take care
of.

Instead of completely deleting [the PDAF] in the budget, Congress just
decided to reallocate it because there are scholars, people undergoing
dialysis who need help. We cant just suddenly pull the plug on that, he
said.

Abad, however, insisted that the practice of recommending projects does
not circumvent the Supreme Courts ruling on the PDAF, which bans
lawmakers from intervening or participating in any of the various post-
enactment stages of the budget execution.
76



75
Aquino more than doubled the congressional pork dispensed annually to the men and women of Congress,
from the P10,861,211,000 (GAA 2010) under the Arroyo administration to P24,620,000,000 (GAA 2011).
76
Abad defends lawmakers practice of recommending projects to govt agencies, 5 March 2014,
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/351235/news/nation/abad-defends-lawmakers-practice-of-
recommending-projects-to-govt-agencies. Last accessed on 10 August 2014.
32

114. Aquino and his administration defended the act of tucking the
discretionary lump sum fund formerly known as PDAF into the budgets of the
agencies. His budget Secretary Florencio Abad, exhibiting his rejection of the
Belgica decision, was quoted as saying that political patronage is expected,
and should even be tolerated:

Pork still working for lawmakers
Abad: Whats wrong with political patronage?

MANILA, PhilippinesBudget Secretary Florencio Abad sees nothing wrong
with lawmakers asking the executive agencies that received the realigned
congressional pork barrel funds to help their constituents seeking medical
assistance, scholarships and the like.

Abad said lawmakers can refer their constituents to the agencies as this was
part of their job and their duties as representatives of the people.

As to concerns that this would only perpetuate the evils of political
patronage, Abad said political patronage will continue to exist as long as
poverty remains and people continue to ask for help from their
representatives.

115. There has always been political patronage. You know why?
Because people will always go to their representatives. When they wake up
in the morning, when theyre in Manila, people line up and ask for help. Can
you eliminate that? Thats something you cannot eliminate. Until we are able
to address rather substantially the problem of poverty, people will always find
a way to go to their mayor, governor, congressman, he told reporters at the
House of Representatives.
77


By perpetuating congressional pork through informal
practices, Aquino is committing, at the maximum,
malfeasance in the performance of his official duties or,
at the minimum, nonfeasance

116. The above discussion shows that at the maximum, Aquino has
breached of his oath of office through malfeasance by perpetuating
congressional pork through informal practices, something which is prohibited
by law. The law says that he should not deal pork to Members of Congress,
yet he violates this law.

117. At the minimum, Aquino has breached of his oath of office
through nonfeasance by failing, upon official and unofficial reports that
informal practices of accessing pork still occur, despite the Decision, in at least
three of his agencies. The law, even the fundamental law of the land, says

77
Supra, Note 25. Emphases supplied.
33

that he should do all within his power to faithfully and conscientiously
execute the laws
78
by installing policies against referral and recommendation
by lawmakers and stopping the violations already reported, yet he fails to do
so.

118. His violation of his sworn duties perpetuates political patronage
and works to the detriment of public interest, depriving the people of equal
access to basic social services.

119. In sum, Aquino, by retaining the congressional pork barrel
through informal acts in violation of the SC Decision prohibiting them, has
betrayed public trust, a treachery to the people compounded by his false
assurance that his administration will comply with the said Decision.

120. It is clear, then, from the foregoing that Aquino is guilty of the
impeachable offense of betrayal of public trust.


SECOND IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE:
CULPABLE VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION

Aquino knowingly, wilfully, and intentionally violated Section 17, Article VII
of the Constitution by perpetuating informal practices of congressional pork
barrel in defiance of the clear and express prohibition of the Supreme Court


Culpable violation of the Constitution

121. Aquinos malfeasance and nonfeasance as regards the law on
congressional pork barrel discussed in the foregoing paragraphs amount to his
culpable violation of the Constitution.

122. According to the framers of the Constitution, culpable violation
of the Constitution means (1) wilful and (2) intentional breach or violation of
the Constitution. Commentaries explain that this offense covers violations
committed intentionally, voluntarily, in bad faith, and not due to errors of law
or honest mistake of judgment.
79


123. Since the ground is provided for by the Constitution, a document
ratified by ordinary people, the term is understood to have its ordinary

78
Sections 5 and 17, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution.
79
Bernas, citing Aruego, The Framing of the Constitution of the Philippines (1939); and Report of the Special
Committee on the Impeachment of President Quirino (1949).
34

meaning. Thus, culpable violation can take on the ordinary or laypersons
termdeserving blame, or guilty of doing something wrong.
80


124. Culpable violation can also take the meaning of culpability in
criminal law, that is, lack of foresight or skill (criminal negligence), freedom of
action, and knowledge or intelligence accompanying the act of violation.

125. Whether in the ordinary or legal sense, Aquino committed
culpable violation of the Constitution by his maintenance and defense of the
congressional pork barrel through informal practices.


Aquino is duty-bound to faithfully and conscientiously
execute the laws yet he violates the law against
congressional pork barrel

126. Section 17, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution made the faithful
execution of the laws one of the primary duties of the President:

The President shall have control of all the executive departments, bureaus,
and offices. He shall ensure that the laws be faithfully executed.
81


127. Due to Article 8 of the Civil Code, this duty of the President
extends to jurisprudential pronouncements:

Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall
form a part of the legal system of the Philippines.

128. In Arturo de Castro v. Judicial and Bar Council,
82
the High Court
explained in unequivocal terms the force and effectivity of jurisprudence:

Judicial decisions assume the same authority as a statute itself and, until
authoritatively abandoned, necessarily become, to the extent that they are
applicable, the criteria that must control the actuations, not only of those
called upon to abide by them, but also of those duty-bound to enforce
obedience to them.

129. The SC in this pronouncement pertains to decisions promulgated
by all courts having judicial power
83
especially itself, which wields the highest
judicial authority. It also pertains to all persons including public officials
mandated to abide and enforce laws especially the President, who is the chief
of all law-enforcement authority.

80
Merriam-Webster.
81
Or the take care clause. Emphases supplied. Also, the oath of the President in Section 5, Article VII.
82
G.R. No. 191002, 20 April 2010.
83
Section 1, Article VIII of the Constitution.
35


130. Despite the clear and express prohibition of the SC, Aquino
perpetuates informal practices of congressional pork barrel. This act
amounts to a violation of a pronouncement of no less than the highest judicial
authority by no less than the highest law-enforcement authority, so soon after
that decision is promulgated and in the amount of at least P25 billion.

131. Aquinos violation is wilful and deliberate as it is being done in
the face of a clear and express pronouncement of the SC. Furthermore,
beyond his fundamental duty to faithfully execute an express prohibition of
the law, Aquino, being the President of the Republic, knows that all these
principles have constitutional underpinnings and are the very bases of a
working democratic and transparent government.

132. The gravity of Aquinos sins to the Filipino people is evident in the
clear, mandatory, and all-encompassing words of the Belgica decision. For as
long as this nation adheres to the rule of law, said the High Court, any of the
multifarious unconstitutional methods and mechanisms the Court has herein
pointed out should never again be adopted in any system of governance, by
any name or form, by any semblance or similarity, by any influence or
effect. Stressing the nature of these violations, the Court added that informal
practices, though unwritten, are likewise acts of grave abuse of discretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.

133. From the foregoing, Aquino is clearly guilty of the impeachable
offense of culpable violation of the Constitution.


CLOSING

134. Complainants accusation is simple: The Supreme Court has laid
down the law clearly and expressly prohibiting congressional pork barrel
including informal practices of dealing it. President Benigno Simeon Aquino III
has no choice but to implement this law, yet he perpetuates congressional
pork barrel by instituting hidden, unwritten means that allow legislators to
intrude into the areas of budget implementation and themselves decide where
the congressional pork should go. This violation of the law erodes the system
of checks and balances, perpetuates political patronage, and deprives the
people of their rights to basic social services.

135. We have here someone expected by the public and the
Constitution to take the lead in implementing the law, yet he is the one who
instructs his alter egos to violate it, or at the very least, sits down and does
nothing about the widespread violation happening right under his nose.

36

136. In filing this impeachment complaint, Complainants do not wish to
deprive the people lining up outside legislators offices in the hopes of securing
a scholarship, or medical, financial, or social welfare assistance of the
economic amelioration that congressional pork surely affords them.
Complainants are saying that no Filipino should ever have to knock on the
doors of politicians before they could avail of basic social services, all of
which should be theirs by a matter of right.

137. This is the purpose of the demand for the abolition not just of
PDAF but also of any scheme like itthe rechanneling of these public funds
to sustain and promote basic social services and the complete transparency
and accountability in the management of these funds. All the government
has to do is ensure that every peso is spent to provide for the needs of the
peoplenot for pogi points of any public official, not to line the pockets of
the few, and not for the political leverage of those in power.

138. Aquinos position that there is nothing wrong with the supposed
entitlement of legislators to large chunks of public funds, that patronage will
always be there, shows that he does not heed this demand for the abolition of
congressional pork along with all forms of pork barrel.

139. There is no doubt, therefore, why he has erected mechanisms
across several of his agencies and mobilized significant public resources to
allow the enabling of unconstitutional legislators entitlement and their
consequent intervention in budget implementation.

140. Complainants have found that Aquino has thrown away their
faith. They call on Congress to institute the only proceedings allowed by the
Constitution by which he can be made to explain his breach of fealty to public
interest and culpable violation of the Constitution and, eventually, be removed
from office.


RELIEF

PREMISES CONSIDERED, Complainants pray that the House of
Representatives Committee on Justice declare that this impeachment
complaint is SUFFICIENT IN FORM AND SUBSTANCE and that there is
PROBABLE CAUSE TO IMPEACH PRESIDENT BENIGNO SIMEON COJUANCGO
AQUINO III.

Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are prayed for.

Quezon City, 11 August 2014.
37







ASSISTED BY:





MANEEKA ASISTOL SARZA
Roll No. 57897
IBP LRNo. 011274/12-17-12
PTR No. 7621794/3-17-14/Quezon City
MCLE Compliance IV-0023102/2-26-14