By: Rafael P. Tuvera

The recent Supreme Court decision striking down the transfer of 60 billion pesos from PhilHealth to the unprogrammed funds has placed the spotlight on former Finance Secretary and now Executive Secretary Ralph Recto. The ruling confirms that the transfer was unconstitutional and it protects taxpayers who were left in the dark when the funds were moved. It also reminds the public that accountability must rest on officials who approved the act. The buck stops at Recto because he carried out the transfer and later defended it as a simple matter of common sense. Whether the trail ends with him or leads to a higher authority is a question that only a real investigation can answer.

After the ruling, the public has regarded Recto as the mastermind behind the illegal transfer of the public funds. It is possible, however, that another official higher than Recto ordered him to execute the act.

On December 5, 2025, Recto publicly stated that his act was based on common sense. This remark has attracted criticism. Common sense is not a legal basis for moving 60 billion in public money. The law requires clear authority and proper procedure. The statement only raised more questions on whether he had any lawful justification in ordering the transfer.

Three basic questions have to be answered. First is whether Recto had the legal authority to order the transfer of the subject funds. Second is whether someone higher than him ordered the transfer if he had no authority to do it. Third is whether the money stayed in the general funds or was used for another purpose. These questions must be addressed in order to determine liability. These questions also show why a full investigation is needed.

The law on public funds is clear. Pursuant to the 1987 Constitution, Congress holds the power of the purse. Money in the public treasury can only be spent if Congress creates an appropriation that allows it. The Executive cannot move public funds unless the law allows it. The President has limited powers to reallocate savings for augmentation but only for items within the same office and only when there are actual savings. These limits protect the taxpayers and prevent abuses.

When it comes to PhilHealth funds, there are stricter rules because they are meant for health benefits of the members. Under Section 11 of the Universal Health Care Act, PhilHealth is required to maintain a reserve amount that can cover two years of expected program costs. It is also required that each year, PhilHealth must set aside part of its annual income as reserves, and any unused funds must be invested with the returns added to these reserves. Hence, these funds cannot be diverted for other purposes and cannot be impounded by the President. They cannot be treated as spare money that can be shifted at will by the executive department. This is why the Supreme Court decision is important. It confirms that PhilHealth funds must remain protected and cannot be used to finance items outside the intended purpose.

Given these limits, the act of transferring 60 billion pesos to the unprogrammed funds becomes a serious matter. The Supreme Court ruled that the transfer was unconstitutional. This ruling creates a strong reason to investigate this matter further. If Recto had no authority to move the funds, then he must explain why he did it. If someone else ordered him to do it, then that person must be identified. If the funds were later used for a different purpose, then the public deserves to know where the money was spent on.

At first glance, some people may believe that Recto may be criminally liable. However, the law requires facts before any charge can be filed. The ruling of the Supreme Court does not, by itself prove criminal intent. It only proves that the act was unconstitutional. To know whether the officials involved committed a crime, investigators must examine the documents and the instructions issued at that time. They must determine whether the transfer violated the penal provisions of the Revised Penal Code, R.A. 3019, or other special laws. A review of the special laws governing PhilHealth must also be conducted. These steps will show whether the transfer was deliberate and unlawful or whether it was the result of wrong advice or misunderstanding of the rules.

This, however, does not excuse the act. Rather, it shows that the proper criminal charge depends on the results of the investigation. If there was an order that violated the law, then responsibility must be fixed on the person who gave the order. If the transfer was used to fund items not approved by Congress, then those who benefitted from it must be examined. The inquiry must look into possible violations of the anti-graft law, or even money laundering law. These are possibilities that must be tested through evidence.

The transfer of 60 billion pesos is not a small matter. PhilHealth funds are vital for the health of millions of Filipinos. The court decision already confirmed that the transfer was against the Constitution. The next step is to identify who made the decision and why the rules were ignored. The inquiry must also reveal how the funds were used after the transfer. These facts will show whether the act was an error or a deliberate misuse of public money.

The public deserves an explanation. The officials involved must account for the act. If Recto acted without authority, then he must answer for it. If he acted under the direction of the President, then he too must also be held responsible. The inquiry will determine whether the act was administrative or criminal. It will also set a clear precedent that transfers of this magnitude cannot be done without clear legal support.

The Supreme Court has done its part by striking down the unconstitutional act. It is now the task of investigators to uncover the full story. It is also the duty of the Executive and Congress to respect the ruling and ensure that similar acts do not happen again. The case is a reminder that public funds must always be afforded full protection. It is also a reminder that government officials cannot rely on common sense alone when handling public money.

The public, however, should not expect a prompt inquiry.  Many officials in the Executive and Legislative branches have been linked to questionable budget practices in the past. This long history of unexplained movements in the national budget raises doubts on whether this case will ever be examined with real independence. The 60 billion peso transfer calls for answers. However, the present environment makes it uncertain if anyone in government will take the necessary steps to uncover the whole truth.

In the end, the public cannot expect President Marcos, Jr. to create a commission similar to the ICI. Any honest investigation will likely lead to the doorstep of Malacanang because the order to move the funds could not have been carried out without Palace approval. This makes it doubtful that the Executive will allow a full and independent inquiry. The 60 billion peso transfer demands answers. However, political reality suggests that the search for the truth may not move beyond the walls of the Palace. For now, the buck stops at Recto.

   

Email: contact@asiancenturyph.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/asiancenturyph/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/AsianCenturyPH

Substack:

Also read: