President's power during the budget execution stage

The Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) was a government policy or strategy designed to stimulate the economy through accelerated spending. In the context of the DAP’s adoption and implementation being a function pertaining to the Executive as the main actor during the Budget Execution Stage under its constitutional mandate to faithfully execute the laws, including the GAAs, Congress did not need to legislate to adopt or to implement the DAP. Congress could appropriate but would have nothing more to do during the Budget Execution Stage. Indeed, appropriation was the act by which Congress “designates a particular fund, or sets apart a specified portion of the public revenue or of the money in the public treasury, to be applied to some general object of governmental expenditure, or to some individual purchase or expense.” (Blacks’ Law Dictionary (6th Ed.) p. 102.)

As pointed out in Gonzales v. Raquiza:

In a strict sense, appropriation has been defined ‘as nothing more than the legislative authorization prescribed by the Constitution that money may be paid out of the Treasury,’ while appropriation made by law refers to ‘the act of the legislature setting apart or assigning to a particular use a certain sum to be used in the payment of debt or dues from the State to its creditors. (G.R. No. 29627, December 19, 1989)

On the other hand, the President, in keeping with his duty to faithfully execute the laws, has sufficient discretion during the execution of the budget to adapt the budget to changes in the country’s economic situation. He could adopt a plan like the DAP for the purpose. He could pool the savings and identify the PAPs to be funded under the DAP. The pooling of savings pursuant to the DAP, and the identification of the program, activity or projects to be funded under the DAP did not involve appropriation in the strict sense because the money had been already set apart from the public treasury by Congress through the GAAs. In such actions, the Executive cannot be said to have usurped the power vested in Congress under Section 29(1), Article VI of the Constitution. (G.R. No. 209287, July 01, 2014, citing Daniel Tomassi, “Budget Execution,” in Budgeting and Budgetary Institutions, ed. Anwar Shah, Washington: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank, 2007), p. 279, available at http://siteresources.worldbank.org.)