DOJ Opinion No. 073, s. 2000

DOJ OPINION NO. 073 , s. 2000 August 24, 2000 Mr. Enrique M. Montero Chairman/Chief Executive Officer Videogram Regulatory Board 2nd Floor CSP Building 815 Quezon Avenue Quezon City Sir : This has reference to your letter, dated August 7, 2000, requesting this Department to render a legal opinion regarding the Videogram Regulatory Board's authority to use its income generated from fees and charges. Specifically, opinion is requested on whether the use of income from fees and charges for the Board's operations is authorized under the second paragraph of Section 16 of Presidential Decree No. 1987 (An Act Creating the Videogram Regulatory Board), dated October 5, 1985, which reads: SECTION 16. Appropriations . . . . All fees, revenues and receipts of the BOARD from any and all sources shall be used to augment the funds to support the expenditures needed by the BOARD in the pursuit of its purposes and objectives and the exercise of its powers and functions, and for such other purposes as may hereafter be directed by the President of the Philippines. cDCEHa You state that since 1993, the Board, upon the recommendation of the Department of Budget and Management (DBM), had been authorized to use P5 million of its income to defray its operational expenses, as contained in the annual General Appropriations Act; that such special provision regarding the use of income has been deleted from the General Appropriations Act for the fiscal year 2000 upon the recommendation of the Department of Budget and Management; and that with this development, you would like to know whether the above provision of Presidential Decree No. 1987 may be used as basis for the authority of the Board to use its income for its operations. With regret, this Department is unable to render the requested opinion. The resolution of the issue pertains to the primary competence of the Department of Budget and Management which, by express provision of law, is "responsible for the efficient and sound utilization of government funds and revenues to effectively achieve our country s development objectives." (Section 3, Chapter I Title XVII, Book IV, Administrative Code of 1987 [Executive Order No. 292]) By settled precedents, the Secretary of Justice has consistently refrained from expressing his views on matters that fall within the primary jurisdiction of another office over which he possesses no revisory authority. (Secretary of Justice Opinion No. 2, series of 1991) Moreover, the resolution of the issue would preempt any action or decision of the Commission on Audit an independent constitutional body upon which this Department's ruling, being merely advisory, would have no binding effect when the question or matter regarding the use of the income derived from fees and charges, if allowed, reaches that body pursuant to the mandate of Section 2 (1), Article IX-D of the present Constitution, which provides that "The Commission on Audit shall have the power, authority, and duty to examine, audit, and settle all accounts pertaining to the revenue and receipts of, and expenditures or uses of funds and property, owned or held in trust by, or pertaining to, the Government, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations with original charters, . . ." EAISDH Very truly yours, (SGD.) ARTEMIO G. TUQUERO Secretary