In Focus: Greco Antonious Beda Banta Belgica Greco Belgica was born on March 28, 1978, a Filipino Statesman and Ordained Minister of the Gospel. He is married to Nina Rizzi Velasco and born to Grepor “Butch” Belgica and Carmelita Banta Belgica, MD. The greatest achievement so far of this man is being a Man of God and being the Prime Mover and Petitioner to question the Constitutionality of Pork Barrel System in Government specifically PDAF – the Congressional Pork Barrel and DAP (Development Acceleration Program – Presidential Pork Barrel in the Supreme Court in G.R. No. 208566 - GRECO ANTONIOUS BEDA B. BELGICA, JOSE M. VILLEGAS JR.(CARLOMAGNO M. BATALLA), JOSE L. GONZALEZ, REUBEN M. ABANTE AND QUINTIN PAREDES SAN DIEGO, .Petitioners, v. THE HONORABLE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR., THE SECRETARY OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT FLORENCIO B. ABAD, THE NATIONAL TREASURER ROSALIA V. DE LEON, THE SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY FRANKLIN M. DRILON, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SENATE PRESIDENT, THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES REPRESENTED BY FELICIANO BELMONTE IN HIS CAPACITY AS SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, Respondents. G.R. No. 208493- SOCIAL JUSTICE SOCIETY (SJS) PRESIDENT SAMSON S. ALCANTARA, Petitioner, v. HONORABLE FRANKLIN DRILON, IN HIS CAPACITY AS SENATE PRESIDENT, AND HONORABLE FELICIANO BELMONTE, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Respondents. G.R. No. 209251 - PEDRITO M. NEPOMUCENO, Petitioner, v. PRESIDENT BENIGNO SIMEON C. AQUINO III AND SECRETARY FLORENCIO BUTCH ABAD, Respondents. And recently on DAP, In its 92-page decision made public, the high court through Associate Justice Lucas Bersamin said programs, activities and projects funded by DAP can be covered by the ‘operative fact doctrine.’ Under the operative fact doctrine, the law is recognized as unconstitutional but the effects of the unconstitutional law, prior to its declaration of nullity may be left undisturbed as a matter of equity and fair play. “The doctrine of operative fact can apply only to the PAPs (programs, activities and projects) that can no longer be undone and whose beneficiaries relied in good faith on the validity of the DAP, but cannot apply to the authors, proponents and implementors of the DAP, unless there are concrete findings of good faith in their favour by the proper tribunals determining their criminal, civil, administrative and other liabilities,” the Supreme Court said. The high court, in its ruling declared unconstitutional National Budget Circular 541 and other related issuances related to the DAP which was issued by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM). This is the source of DAP. The circular also allows “withdrawn allotments” to be used to “augment existing programs and projects of any agency [emphasis by DBM] and to fund priority programs and projects not considered in the 2012 budget but expected to be started or implemented during the current year,” Abad wrote department heads, including budget and accounting officers. Also declared in violation of Section 25 (5) Article VI of the 1987 Constitution are the following acts; 1. The withdrawal of unobligated allotments from the implementing agencies, and the declaration of the withdrawn unobligated allotments and unreleased appropriations as savings prior to the end of the fiscal year and without complying with the statutory definition of savings contained in the General Appropriations Acts; 2. The cross-border transfers of the savings of the Executive to augment the appropriations of other offices outside the Executive; 3. The funding of projects, activities and programs that were not covered by any appropriation in the GAA; 4. The use of unprogrammed funds despite the absence of a certification by the National Treasurer that the revenue collections exceeded the revenue targets for non-compliance with the conditions provided in the relevant GAA. The said provision states that “no law shall be passed authorizing any transfer of appropriations; however, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions may, by law, be authorized to augment any item in the general appropriations law for their respective offices from savings in other items of their respective appropriations.” The four enumerated acts covers the entire DAP. Education: Post Graduate Studies on International trade and Commerce – University of California, Berkeley Extension Bachelor of Science in Marketing and Management – San Beda College, Manila Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila – Law Special Studies on Biblical Principles in Civil Government and Biblical Law and Biblical Economics Career Greco Bélgica serves as an elder of the Lords Vineyard Church, and is currently president of the Yeshua Change Agents, a non-government organization involved in anti-drug campaigns and advocating reconstruction of society to its biblical form. He is also the founder of ReformPH Movement. He previously served as councilor of the Sixth District of the City of Manila from 2004 to 2007 and chairman of the Committee on Police, Peace and Order Fire and Public Safety and the Committee on Economic Development. He was also appointed Board member of the Manila Anti-Drug Abuse Council. 2013 Senatorial Bid Greco Bélgica is a candidate in the 2013 Philippine Senate election under the newly accredited Democratic Party of the Philippines and Partido Manggagawa at Magsasaka. Views on Taxation and Governance One of Greco Bélgicas campaign promises is a flat tax system for the Philippines; in particular, a simple, one-time, and one kind tax of not more than 10% only on net income on both individual and business profits. He also espouses belief in a limited and decentralized form of government, the free market, and Christian Reconstructionism. He leads the campaign to convert the PDAF and other discretionary funds of politicians to tuition vouchers for all students and capital for families, individuals and businessmen. He believes that money and resources should be in the hands of people and not with politicians and government. Pork Barrel System declared unconstitutional (Greco Belgica, et al. v. Executive Secretary Ochoa. et al. G.R. No. 208566, Nov. 19, 2013) In 2013, Greco Belgica and his group questioned the constitutionality of the pork barrel system. A very controversial case that had three prior Supreme Court rulings that said the country wide development fund or CDF and PDAF or the priority development fund of legislators were constitutional. However, with a much celebrated decision, after three months, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Belgica, with a unanimous vote of 14-0-1 abstain, and said that pork barrel system is unconstitutional. In its landmark decision G.R. No. 208566 the Supreme Court defined that the pork barrel funds are lump sum discretionary funds appropriated in both the executive and legislative department. It further held, that there two kinds of pork barrel funds. The executive lump sum discretionary funds and the legislative lump sum discretionary fund known as the PDAF Greco Belgica also questioned the constitutionality of the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) and the 2014 Lump Sums in the budget. Petitioners: Greco Antonious Beda B. Belgica, Bishop Reuben Abante, Rev.Jojo Gonzales, Quintin Paredes San Diego, Atty. Jose Malvar Villegas, Atty. Samson Alcantara, Pedrito Nepomuceno Respondents: The Honorable Executive Secretary Paquito N. Ochoa,Jr., Department of Budget and Management Secretary Florencio B. Abad, National Treasurer Rosalia V. De Leon, The Senate of the Philippines represented by Franklin S. Drilon in his capacity as Senate President, and The House of Representatives represented by Speaker Feliciano S. Belmonte in his capacity as Speaker of the House, Department of Budget and Management. Dr. Delmar Topinio Taclibon, Bt., DKR, KRSS, BSCE, MBA, Ph.D.D.A. Source: REFORMPH Personal Knowledge Wikipedia
Posted on: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 10:14:44 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015