SolGen to seek partial reconsideration of SC ruling on past budgets

The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) said Thursday it would seek clarification and partial reconsideration of certain parts of the Supreme Court (SC) decision which declared as unconstitutional the national budget laws in 2024 and 2025, and legislated provisions relating to unprogrammed funds.

This came a day after Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Claire Castro said Malacañang "respectfully disagrees" with certain parts of the ruling, asking the high court to carefully review it.

The Palace said the OSG has been tasked to file the motion for reconsideration.

The OSG confirmed that it received a copy of the SC decision, which it said it respects. However, the OSG said it would challenge certain parts, "particularly the guardrails prescribed for the exercise of budgetary powers."

"The OSG agrees that safeguards are essential to ensure transparency, accountability, and fiscal discipline in the use of public funds. The complex challenge, however, lies in distinguishing the safeguards that are required by the Constitution from those whose formulation falls within the constitutionally provided powers of Congress and the Executive," it said.

EXPLAINER: SC voids multi-trillion-peso budget laws in 2024 and 2025. Now what?

"The OSG will respectfully seek clarification and partial reconsideration to ensure that the guardrails prescribed in the Decision remain consistent with this constitutional allocation of powers," it added.

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court struck down the General Appropriations Acts (GAAs) for 2024 and 2025 after Congress added appropriations beyond what the President had recommended in the National Expenditure Program.

Specifically, the 2024 budget was voided due to a P449.5-billion increase in unprogrammed appropriations, while the 2025 budget was struck down because of the additional P17.99 billion for the Special Road Fund of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH).

The High Court likewise deemed as unconstitutional Special Provisions 1(a) and (b), Chapter XLIII in the 2026 GAA authorizing unprogrammed appropriations. It then set conditions that would allow the such appropriations to be constitutional.

The OSG noted that the 12 separate opinions accompanying the SC decision "reflect the complexity of the constitutional questions presented and the differing judicial perspectives on their resolution."

The OSG said it would carefully consider such opinions in its further action. — VDV, GMA News