(Photo courtesy of Senate)
Senator Panfilo Lacson on Thursday, October 15, criticized Vice President Sara Duterte’s suggestion that the proposed 2027 national budget could be used to influence impeachment votes, saying the allegation unfairly implicates lawmakers who have consistently opposed pork barrel allocations.
Lacson, who serves as a senator-judge in Duterte’s impeachment trial, said the Vice President’s remarks failed to distinguish legislators who have protected the integrity of public spending from those allegedly involved in budget manipulation.
“A sweeping statement from no less than the country’s second-highest official is unfair to those of us who have consistently upheld the integrity of the national budget and served as its vanguards,” Lacson said.
He emphasized that his opposition to pork barrel funds has remained consistent throughout his Senate career.
“In all my years as a senator, I have never succumbed to the allure of pork barrel, in whatever shape and form,” he added.
Duterte on Wednesday raised concerns over alleged cash distributions and political maneuvering surrounding the proposed Php 7.2-trillion national budget for 2027.
She questioned whether government funds were being used to influence senator-judges handling her impeachment case or reward House lawmakers who supported the complaint against her.
“Is the budget being used to serve the Filipino people, or has it become a bargaining chip to pressure senators who will sit as judges and reward those who vote ‘yes’ in the House of Representatives?” Duterte said in a social media statement.
Her remarks followed the Senate impeachment court’s decision to allow the House prosecution to withdraw three of the four impeachment articles against her, leaving allegations involving unexplained wealth and undisclosed business interests as the remaining charge.
Lacson recalls rejecting P50-M allocation
Lacson also cited his experience during the 2012 impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona to reinforce his position against political incentives linked to congressional proceedings.
He recalled rejecting an offer of Php 50 million worth of projects during a senators’ caucus held after Corona’s conviction.
The issue resurfaced in 2013 when then Senator Jinggoy Estrada disclosed additional funding releases to senators following the impeachment trial, prompting questions about whether the allocations were connected to their votes.
Lacson, who voted to convict Corona, maintained that he refused the additional funding.
The senator has repeatedly opposed discretionary allocations and arrangements that allow lawmakers to influence the distribution of government funds outside established budget priorities.
Meanwhile, questions surrounding possible political influence in the 2027 budget have intensified amid scrutiny of infrastructure appropriations.
An investigation published earlier this month by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) identified significant disparities in proposed public works funding across congressional districts.
The report noted reductions in allocations affecting several lawmakers who opposed Duterte’s impeachment.
However, the findings did not establish that senator-judges had been offered budgetary incentives in exchange for their impeachment votes.
The Senate has begun examining the House-approved 2027 budget, with finance subcommittees instructed to submit their reports by October 23.
Lacson maintained that allegations involving the budget and impeachment proceedings should not undermine the record of lawmakers who have consistently rejected pork barrel allocations.
