Practice question
Near midyear, an executive adviser finds unreleased amounts for continuing projects. The facts establish that these amounts do not meet the governing appropriation law's definition of savings. The adviser nevertheless recommends declaring them savings solely because they remain unreleased, then using them to augment another executive item under a valid augmentation statute. What is the decisive defect?
- The proposed source is not lawful savings; unreleased status alone cannot satisfy the governing definition
- All augmentation within the executive branch is categorically forbidden
- Every unreleased appropriation automatically becomes savings at noon on June 30
- Presidential signature converts any balance into savings without statutory limits
- The presence of an existing recipient item cures any defect in the source
Legal references
- 1987 Constitution, Article VI, Sections 25 and 29(1), and Article VII, Section 22, presidential budget and appropriation limits: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/3/353
- Araullo v. Aquino III, G.R. No. 209287 and consolidated cases, February 3, 2015, main resolution, savings and prohibition of cross-border transfers: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2015/feb2015/gr_209287_2015.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.