OSG Prepares Government’s Comment on Petition Challenging Constitutionality of Maharlika Investment Fund Act
Despite the suspension of the Implementation Rules and Regulations (IRR) on the Maharlika Investment Fund (MIF) Act, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) remains committed to preparing the government’s comment on the petition challenging the law’s constitutionality.
Solicitor General Menardo I. Guevarra revealed on Wednesday, October 18 that his office has not yet received the official copy of the Supreme Court’s (SC) resolution instructing the Executive and Legislative branches to comment on the petition against the MIF law under Republic Act No. 11954.
The resolution, which required respondents to comment on the petition and the plea for a temporary restraining order (TRO), was issued by the SC during its full court session on October 3.
Guevarra stated, “If the implementation is indeed suspended, it’s up to the petitioners if they wish to withdraw the petition. But if they don’t, and the SC does not suspend the proceedings either, the OSG will be prepared to submit its comment on the validity of the MIF law.”
President Marcos recently suspended the enforcement of the MIF’s IRR “pending further study.” The suspension was announced through a memorandum on October 12 by Executive Secretary Lucas P. Bersamin on behalf of the President.
The memorandum directed the Bureau of Treasury, Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP), and the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) to notify all concerned heads of departments, bureaus, offices, and other agencies of the Executive Department, including government-owned and controlled corporations.
The petition challenging the constitutionality of the MIF law was filed by Sen. Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III, former congressman and Bayan Muna Chairman Neri Javier Colmenares, and former Bayan Muna congressmen Carlos Isagani Zarate and Ferdinand Gaite.
The petition raised three primary arguments: that RA 11954 was passed in violation of Section 26 (2), Article VI, of the 1987 Constitution; that the test of economic viability as required under Section 16, Article XII of the Constitution was not met before the creation of the Maharlika Investment Corporation; and that RA 11954 infringes upon the independence of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, as stipulated in Section 20, Article XII of the Constitution.
The petition contended that the Maharlika Investment Fund Act of 2023 “requires intense congressional scrutiny, genuine consultation with stakeholders, and a careful study by independent economic experts.”
However, it alleged that “both Houses of Congress, however, went on the opposite direction and rushed the Maharlika bills and short-circuited the constitutionally mandated legislative processes, through an unnecessary and constitutionally infirm Presidential certification of urgency.”
President Marcos previously stated that the MIF is a tool for economic development that will enhance fiscal stability through strategic and profitable investments in key sectors.
He further elaborated that the fund would be invested in a diverse range of assets, including foreign currencies, fixed-income instruments, domestic and foreign corporate bonds, joint ventures, mergers and acquisitions, real estate, high-impact infrastructure projects, and projects contributing to the achievement of sustainable development.
