HOME

ABOUT
LIBRARY »
COLLECTIONS »
CLIENTELE
FAQs
SCHEDULE
SERVICES
PUBLICATIONS
OPAC
CONTACT US

Menu

PATHFINDER: Special Allowances for the Judiciary (SAJ) Fund / Judiciary

Development Fund (JDF)
January 15, 2014 Pathfinder

COLLECTION OF NEWSPAPER ARTICLES ON SPECIAL ALLOWANCES FOR THE JUDICIARY (SAJ) FUND /
JUDICIARY DEVELOPMENT FUND (JDF)

Palace claims periodic JDF report to Aquino under law | The Daily Tribune – Without Fear or Favor

* Written by Paul Atienza

* Tuesday, 06 August 2013 08:00

The Palace defended yesterday its insertion in the proposed budget next year of a requirement for the Supreme Court to issue
quarterly reports to President Aquino on the disbursement of the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) as not a Palace attempt to
encroach into the independence of the Judiciary but is a mere implementation of the law that had created the fund.

A spokesman of President Aquino denied the Palace is trying to exercise control of the billion of pesos in the JDF which is used to
augment expenses of the judicial branch with the requirement.

“We’re not trying to assert control. This is all under the control of the Supreme Court. This is pursuant to its fiscal autonomy,”
Aquino’s spokesman Edwin Lacierda said.

Lacierda, however, was vague about the required quarterly report to the President being part of the law saying only that the
proposed special provision on the JDF in the budget sought to guarantee that the funds are spent based on the 80 percent of the
fund being used for cost of living allowances and the remaining as share of local courts for the acquisition of equipment and
refurbishment.

“This is a law which was enacted during the time of (Former President Ferdinand) Marcos or Presidential Decree 1949 which
established the JDF,” Lacierda said.

Lacierda quoted a provision in the decree that “the fund shall be used to augment the allowances of the members and personnel of
the judiciary and to finance acquisition, maintenance, and repair of office equipment and facilities; provided, that at least 80 percent
of the fund shall be used for cost of living allowances and not more than 20 percent of the said fund shall be used for office
equipment and facilities of the courts located wherever the legal fees are collected”.

“This provision is also found in the expenditure program for Fiscal Year 2014 or the proposed budget. So this is not something new.
This provision is found in PD 1949,” Lacierda said.

“So this is not a new provision. This was the PD that created the Judiciary Development Fund. So we’d like to disabuse media that
the Palace seeks to control the Judiciary Development Fund,” Lacierda said.

What is stated under the decree regarding the review of the funds’ use is that “the Commission on Audit through the auditor of the
Supreme Court or his duly authorized representative shall quarterly audit the receipts, revenues, uses, disbursements, and
expenditures of the fund.”

The supposed misuse of the JDF was among the issues raised against former SC Chief Justice Renato Corona in the impeachment
trial was also the same issue raised against former Chief Justice Hilario Davide in a failed attempt to impeach him.

Lacierda maintained that Malacañang, which has enough budget allocation rather than the Supreme Court in the 2014 budget
proposal to Congress, does not assert to control the JDF.

“What we’re saying is that the 80 to 20 ratio is not a new provision that just came out of nowhere. This is a word-for-word
adoption of PD no. 1949 and it’s under the control of the Supreme Court,” Lacierda said.

The Tribune asked Lacierda if the Palace thinks that the PD is still just and fair which was issued by Marcos in the exercise of his
legislative power as President of the dictatorial form government?

“It has not been amended or repealed by Congress. Remember that we… This is a presidential decree (that) has a force and effect
of law.

“During the time of Marcos, he also had the lawmaking powers, and so this particular PD can only be repealed by Congress—by
an act of Congress.

Lacierda said that the Marcos’ PDs has to be applied by the Aquino administration without restraint because the Marcos PDs
remain as law whether it is just or not.

“This is a law that is valid, so we apply what this law… This PD created a Judiciary Development Fund and this serves as a
guidance for the application of the Judiciary Development Fund,” Lacierda said.

In 2003, Davide was accused by members of Congress of misusing the JDF. Davide was then defended by then University of the
Philippines professor Lourdes Sereno, now the Chief Justice after being appointed by Aquino.

“It has not been amended or repealed by Congress,” Lacierda pointed out. “This is a presidential decree (that) has a force and
effect of law. During the time of Marcos, he also had the lawmaking powers, and so this particular PD can only be repealed by
Congress—by an act of Congress.”

House members who had reviewed the proposed said the insertion was clearly a Palace attempt to control the JDF that goes
against the Constitutional guarantee of fiscal autonomy granted to the Judiciary.

“The move should be cause for alarm. Lawmakers should oppose this,” Bayan Muna partylist Rep. Carlos Zarate said even as
other lawmakers joined in opposing the provision in Malacañang’s proposed budget for 2014 that the Supreme Court (SC) should
account for the disbursements in the JDF.

The provision was inserted in the proposed P2.268-trillion General Appropriations Act of 2014.

House Deputy Majority Leader Sherwin Tugna of Citizens Battle Against Corruption (Cibac), Ang NARS partylist Rep. Leah
Paquiz and Gabriela partylist Rep. Luzviminda Ilagan opposed the Palace’s insertion of such provisions in its proposed 2014
national budget.

“The provision will violate the fiscal autonomy granted by the Constitution to the Judiciary. The reason for the autonomy is to
insulate the Judiciary from other government agencies so that it can render impartial justice,” Tugna said.

Published in Headlines | The Daily Tribune – Without Fear or Favor

======================================================================================

Special allowances for judges okayed | The Manila Bulletin Newspaper Online.
By MADEL R. SABATER and BEN ROSARIO
April 6, 2011, 6:19pm, Manila Bulletin

MANILA, Philippines — President Aquino yesterday witnessed the signing of a memorandum of agreement (MOA) granting the
 salary augmentation of government personnel in the judiciary.

The MOA was signed at the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) head office Wednesday afternoon between DBM
Secretary Florencio Abad, Philippine Judges Association president Antonio Eugenio Jr.; Metropolitan and City Judges Association
president Jaime Santiago; Philippine Trial Judges League, Inc. president Josefina Siscar, and Retired Judges Association president
Basilio Ramiscal.

“More than anything, we showed to that we are not deaf to their pleas,” Aquino said during the ambush interview following the
MOA signing.

DBM Secretary Florencio Abad said the funding will possibly be released within the week.

“There is an item in the budget that is called miscellaneous personal benefits fund. That fund is usually resorted to when there is this
distortion or imbalance in the pay that is enjoyed by some, either in general in the bureaucracy or by some segments of the
bureaucracy,” Abad explained.

Militant lawmakers welcomed Malacanang’s decision to grant members of the judiciary pay increases but lamented its continued
refusal to back a legislated wage hike proposed in the House of Representatives.

Reps. Nery Colmenares (Bayan Muna Partylist) and Luz Ilagan (Gabriela Party-list) said President Aquino should demonstrate his
concern to the ordinary wage earners by supporting the bill which he previously backed as a congressman.

“While it is good that members of the judiciary already have their pay hike, minimum wage earners as well as other government
employees should also have their wage and salary increases as well,” said Colmenares, co-author of the legislated wage hike bill.

Under the MOA, the DBM will be setting aside P108-million in funds for the salary augmentation of the judiciary which will enable
the judiciary to augment their salary equivalent to those in the bureaucracy covered by the Salary Standardization Law (SSL) III.

The MOA states that there will be 100 percent restoration of the Special Allowances for Judges (SAJ) law or Republic Act 9227.

In his speech, however Aquino said that this is only a short term solution as the long term solution is in the hands of Congress to
amend the SAJ law.

===============================================================================================

House to stop special judiciary allowances

By Jess Diaz (The Philippine Star) Updated September 10, 2012 12:00 AM

MANILA, Philippines – The House of Representatives will most likely stop the payment of special allowances to members of the
judiciary. Cavite Rep. Joseph Emilio Abaya, appropriations committee chairman, told reporters that he was inclined to support
President Aquino’s decision to discontinue the special allowances for the judiciary (SAJ) fund.

“It’s clear that the purpose of the fund has already been attained. The special allowances were not a perpetual incentive,” he said.
Congress created the fund four years ago when it enacted the Salary Standardization Law (SSL) III, which called for upgrading
government salaries over four years.

The last tranche of the increase under such law was paid in July.

As intended, the special judiciary allowances were to be treated as advance payments for the four-year increases under SSL III.

Abaya said the continued payment of the special allowances would distort the standardized government pay scales and put to
naught the salary standardization program.

His committee has learned that the full salary rates in the judiciary have already been met.

A Supreme Court (SC) justice, for instance, is now receiving gross monthly compensation of between P125,000 to P130,000.

In his proposed P2-trillion 2013 national budget, Aquino has discontinued SAJ and directed that court fees that go into the fund be
turned over to the national treasury, instead of to the SC.

Even without the fund, lawmakers have discovered that the SC has another source for special allowances.
 This year, the judiciary was given P1.82 billion for the filling of more than 500 vacant positions for judges.

SC administrator Midas Marquez has told congressional budget hearings that of the P1.82 billion, the high court has used P980
million for the payment of allowances and bonuses, and P2.2 million for the hiring of casual employees.

He did not say how much was used, if any, for the filing of vacancies, which he said have increased to 591 as of January this year
from 553 in December 2010.

Congressmen have complained that many courts in their provinces do not have judges.

Marquez also said the number of pending cases has increased. He said the backlog in regional trial courts had gone up to 388,000
cases in December 2011 from 377,000 a year before.

In metropolitan trial courts, the backlog increased from 82,000 in 2010 to 82,664 by the end of 2011.

Quezon Rep. Erin Tañada and other lawmakers have urged newly appointed Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno to speed up
delivery of justice by filling court vacancies and shortening the time for resolving cases.

View previous articles from this author | Subscribe to this author via RSS

===============================================================================================

Congress leaders defy Aquino order

By Christine F. Herrera | Posted on Aug. 05, 2013 at 12:01am

Palace bid to control Judiciary’s fund questioned

ADMINISTRATION allies in the House and Senate said Sunday they would defy President Benigno Aquino III’s bid to seize
control of co-equal branches of government by stripping the Judiciary of its fiscal autonomy and by taking away Congress’ power of
the purse in the 2014 budget.

Senator Francis Escudero, chairman of the Senate committee on finance, and his counterpart in the House, Davao City Rep. Isidro
Ungab, chairman of the House committee on appropriations, said they would study the Palace-proposed special provisions carefully
to see if there was a legal basis for stripping the Supreme Court of its control over the P7 billion Judiciary Development Fund and
P2.5 billion in allocations for unfilled positions.

The budget also requires the Supreme Court to submit quarterly reports to the President on the status and use of the JDF and other
funds, prompting one Sandiganbayan justice to complain about the President’s “fiscal dictatorship.”

House leaders led by Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr. and National Unity Party party whip Dasmariñas City Rep. Elpidio Barzaga
Jr. said they would not also allow the Palace to take away from lawmakers the right to identify a total of P27-billion in pork barrel
projects.

In the 2014 budget, lawmakers are presented with a menu of approved budgets, and cannot depart from the Palace-provided list.

Barzaga and Iloilo City Rep. Jerry Treñas of the Liberal Party said the poorest of the poor would suffer if lawmakers could no
longer bring home projects to their districts.

Escudero vowed to “review with much scrutiny” the special provisions in the budget.

“We will hear out the agencies concerned including the Judiciary,” Escudero told the Manila Standard. “We will balance the need
for transparency and accountability on the one hand and the fiscal autonomy of certain constitutional offices.”

Ungab, an LP party whip and party mate of President Aquino, expressed reluctance to immediately accede to the Palace’s special
provisions.

“I will reserve my comment until after the committee takes up the budget of the Judiciary,” Ungab said in separate interview.

Ungab said the legal infirmities or correctness of the special provisions had to be studied carefully because the fiscal autonomy of the
Judiciary was mandated by the Constitution.

“I understand the purpose of the budget is to ensure transparency and good governance. The committee will first study if indeed it
encroaches on the independence of the Judiciary as a co-equal branch of government and will make its recommendations when the
budget is taken up in the plenary,” Ungab said.

In the House, some 188 lawmakers had used allegations of irregularities in the distribution of the JDF as a ground to impeach
Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona. Although Corona had argued fiscal autonomy, the President lobbied heavily and the
chief justice was ousted after a three-month trail before the Senate.

Ungab signed the impeachment complaint while Escudero, acting as a senator-judge in the impeachment trial, voted to expel Corona
last year.

Under the special provisions, the Palace requires that funds from the collection of legal fees be deposited in the National Treasury
and established that 80 percent of the fund would be allocated for the payment of the cost of living allowances and not more than 20
percent would be used for the purchase of office equipment and facilities of the courts where the legal fees were collected.

Another provision shows that the P2.5 billion for 5,725 unfilled positions of judges and staff nationwide and some P42.6 million for
the Presidential Electoral Tribunal shall be released “upon actual hiring.”

At least 500 judges nationwide needed to be hired, Corona told the Manila Standard last year.

“The Supreme Court shall submit, either in printed form or by way of electronic document, to the Office of the President quarterly
reports on the utilization of said amounts,” the special provision reads.

The payroll of the Judiciary’s 30,912 justices, judges and staff would also be included in the single payroll system.

Even the Judiciary’s paper clips, ball pens, bond paper, folders and other “common-use supplies” would be procured from the
wholesale store of the Department of Budget and Management, the provision says.

The Sandiganbayan justice said the Palace was violating the principle of co-equal branches by undermining the Judiciary’s
independence.

This, the justice said, was the Palace’s way of compelling the Supreme Court to kowtow to the whims and pressure of the
Executive.

Turning his attention to pork barrel, Belmonte said the development funds were important, particularly for far-flung communities and
vowed the House would not give up its power of the purse.

Treñas, a member of the LP, agreed and said abolishing pork barrel will “do more harm than good,” especially in the countryside.

But Treñas, at the same time, was willing to make a compromise.

“The pork barrel system should just be tweaked in such as way that it is no longer possible for anyone to misuse and abuse
congressional entitlements,” said Treñas, in a statement.

“The wide-scale abuse of the PDAF is totally unacceptable and should be stopped at all cost but we don’t need to abolish pork to
do that. What we need is to institute more measures to free it from corruption and abuse,” Trenas said.

Trenas suggested that projects that are funded by the PDAF should be pre-identified for each congressional district in the budget
line by line.

This would mean all allocations would be subject to scrutiny, he added.

“In other words if this non-government organization or NGO is named to implement the project, that will be printed in the budget
proposal and the public and media have about four months to scrutinize if the NGO is bogus or legitimate,” Trenas said.

Barzaga, in an interview over radio dzBB, said he had already filed a complaint before the ethics panel to have Abakada Rep.
Jonathan dela Cruz investigated for releasing an “unsubstantiated information” about 98 of his peers, whom he did not identify.

“Congressman Dela Cruz should be penalized for his careless and sweeping pronouncements against his colleagues because he did
not only hurt the reputation of all his peers but also of the institution,” Barzaga said.

Barzaga blamed the Commission on Audit for not doing its job to guard the misuse of public funds.

“Pork barrel is public fund. It is subject to COA audit,” he said. He added that if the COA was doing its job well, the problem of
 pork barrel abuse would be solved.

“We don’t write checks payable to ourselves,” he said.

=======================================================================================================

Leyte solon seeks extra pay for constitutional bodies | Malaya Business News Online
Submitted by on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 – 00:00

OPPOSITION lawmaker Leyte Rep. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez has proposed the grant of additional allowances for members
of Constitutional offices and the Ombudsman.

Romualdez, in his House Bill 3332, said this would “entice and attract capable men and women of proven probity, integrity, loyalty
efficiency and independence to serve in such sensitive offices.”

Romualdez said that his bill was inspired by the motivation behind the enactment of Republic Act 9227 which granted additional
compensation in the form of special allowances to all justices and judges in the judiciary.

“HB 3332, in effect, extends to the chairmen and commissioners of the three constitutional commissions and the Ombudsman the
same benefits enjoyed by the judiciary,” Romualdez said.

The three independent constitutional commissions are the Commission on Elections, Civil Service Commission, and the Commission
on Audit.

He said the three commissions play the role of countervailing institutions by providing an independent check to the three branches of
government – legislative, executive, and the judiciary – in respect to their respective areas of concern and competence.

“In real sense, given the nature of their responsibilities as well as the unique role that they play in the scheme of things, they virtually
constitute the fourth (4th) branch of government that is perceived as co-equal and co-important with the other branches, including
the Judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court,” Romualdez said.

The Ombudsman, he added, likewise an independent constitutional body, enjoys the same rank and salary as that of the chairmen of
the constitutional commissions and plays a vital role as the constitutional mechanism for enforcement of accountability of all public
officers.

Romualdez further recalled that before the enactment of R.A. 9227, the salary levels and retirement benefits of the members of the
constitutional commissions and the Ombudsman were at par with and in the same category as that of the justices of the Supreme
Court.

“This bill is thus in recognition of its necessity and aims to standardize the compensation structure and retirement benefits amongst
Supreme Court Justices, members of the constitutional commissions and the Ombudsman,” Romualdez said.

Category: National
- See more at: http://www.malaya.com.ph/business-news/news/leyte-solon-seeks-extra-pay-constitutional-bodies#sthash.Q7dPdzyw.dpuf

Budgets, Government Officials and Employees--Salaries Wages and Allowances, Judiciary, Judiciary Development Fund (JDF), Pork barrel,
Supreme Court (SC), Supreme Court justices

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name *

Email *

Website
Comment

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote
cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Post Comment

Pages

ABOUT THIS BLOG

CLIENTELE
COLLECTIONS
E-Legislative Resources
Online Newsclippings
Printed Legislative Collection
FAQs
LIBRARY
Contact Us
Functions
Library Staff
OPAC
PUBLICATIONS
SCHEDULE
SERVICES

Government Links
Commission on Elections (COMELEC)
House of Representatives
HREP Legis on the Web
HREP Webmail
Library OPAC
MMDA Website
National Statistics Office (NSO)
Office of the National Administrative Register (ONAR)
Official Gazette PHL
Philippine Information Agency (PIA)
Senate of the Philippines
Supreme Court of the Philippines

Useful Links

LawPhil Project
Newsbreak
PCIJ Blog
Thomas Library of Congress (U.S)
U.S. House of Representatives
U.S. Senate
VERA Files
World Newspapers Map

Archives
 Select Month

Categories
ABS-CBN News Online
Daily Tribune
Featured Stories
Library
Malaya
Manila Bulletin
Manila Standard Today
Manila Times
Pathfinder
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Philippine Star

Site Visits since 6/24/2013

Webs Tracking

Search this blog

Search

Library OPAC

Click to search the Legislative Library's Online Public Access Catalog (OPAC) powered by Koha.

List of House Members

Click to view the list of House Members of the 16th Congress of the Philippines.

Bill Drafting

View/search for bills

and resolutions filed/authored/referred by the Members of Congress, statistics of bills and resolutions filed
Recent Comments

anonymous on Solon seeks higher income tax exemption for K+12 parents | The Daily Tribune – Without Fear or Favor
Lando on Senate eyeing creation of relief, rehab agency
Paul on Senate eyeing creation of relief, rehab agency
Iya on Senate eyeing creation of relief, rehab agency
Oebt on Senate eyeing creation of relief, rehab agency
Janice on Senate eyeing creation of relief, rehab agency
paulina on Senate passes P1.6T budget; P100B fund for rehab proposed | Malaya Business News Online
Iya on Senate passes P1.6T budget; P100B fund for rehab proposed | Malaya Business News Online
Julio on Senate passes P1.6T budget; P100B fund for rehab proposed | Malaya Business News Online
Baldo on Senate passes P1.6T budget; P100B fund for rehab proposed | Malaya Business News Online

Tags

2013 Elections Appropriations Banks and Banking Benigno Simeon Aquino III Benigno Simeon Aquino III
Administration Bill drafting Boundary disputes Budgets Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) Calamities Commission on Audit (CoA)

Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Congress Congressional hearings Constitution Department of Budget and
Management (DBM) Department of Justice (DoJ) Disasters Disbursement Acceleration P rogram (DAP) Education Elections Feliciano R.
M. Macapagal-Arroyo (REP.) Graft and corruption Health House of
Belmonte Jr. (REP.) Gloria
Representatives (HOR) Impeachment Janet Lim Napoles Members of Congress (House)
Members of Congress (Senate) Niel C. T upas Jr. (REP.) Office of the Ombudsman Political parties--Liberal Part y (LP ) Political part ies--
Pork barrel Pork barrel scam Priority Development
United Nat ionalist Alliance (UNA) Poll automation

Assistance Fund (PDAF) Renato C. Corona Senate of the Philippines Statement of

Assets Liabilities and Net Worth (SALn) Supreme Court (SC) Supreme Court justices Taxation
T obias Reynald M. T iangco (REP .)

Inquirer.net

Poverty a ‘social scandal’–CBCP January 28, 2014

358 new HIV cases reported in December January 28, 2014
Doctors seek return of hospitals to DOH January 28, 2014
Church still firm vs RH law but wants no enemies because of it January 28, 2014
3 Cabinet members face raps over Malampaya funds January 28, 2014
BIR bucks bills to raise tax exemptions January 28, 2014
SWS: Aquino better than the rest January 28, 2014

Recent Posts
COMPILATION OF NEWS ARTICLES ON NATIONAL TRANSMISSION CORPORATION (TRANSCO) [8
ARTICLES]
Clean-up at DOF; Ombudsman targets BIR, Customs in lifestyle checks | Malaya Business News Online
Solon pushes transfer of Napoles to Makati City Jail | The Daily Tribune – Without Fear or Favor
Atienza expresses strong opposition to reclamation project in Manila Bay | The Daily Tribune – Without Fear or Favor
Protest against proposal to ban back-ride on motorcycles gains support | The Daily Tribune – Without Fear or Favor

Calendar

January 2014
S M T WT F S
1 2 3 4
 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
« Dec

Categories

ABS-CBN News Online

Daily Tribune
Featured Stories
Library
Malaya
Manila Bulletin
Manila Standard Today
Manila Times
Pathfinder
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Philippine Star

Archives

Select Month

Search from this blog

Search

Library OPAC

Click the image above to direct you to the Legislative Library's Online Public Access Catalog (OPAC) powered by Koha.

© 2014 House of Representatives Library Current Information Service

Powered by WordPress | Theme Designed by: Payment Protection Insurance | Thanks to Identify PPI Claims, Click here and PPI