Albay 1st District Rep. Edcel Lagman on Friday warned that any planned petitions to challenge the constitutionality of the controversial Maharlika Investment Fund (MIF) before the Supreme Court will not likely prosper.
In a statement, Lagman explained that he sees no "constitutional infirmity" in the MIF bill to merit the "Supreme Court’s exercise of judicial review."
He also mentioned that "congressional wisdom and expediency are not justiciable issues before the Supreme Court."
The Albay Representative, who is also not in favor of the MIF's passing, then cited the higher court's ruling on Tañada vs. Tuvera, December 29, 1986, which stated that “the courts do not involve themselves with or delve into the policy or wisdom of a statute."
According to Lagman, instead of spending the ₱500 billion initial money of the Maharlika, this could have been allotted to support the national budget fundamental socio-economic services and infrastructure development.
"The country does not have a revenue surplus and even has a surfeit of negative economic indicators like a huge fiscal deficit; high inflation rate; a very low human development index ranking; and poor gross domestic product (GDP) per capita," he added.
The MIF bill got approval from Congress after the House of Representatives adopted Senate Bill 2020, the version of the Senate, during the bicameral conference committee held at the Manila Polo Club in Makati City on Thursday, May 31.
The measure is now inches to become a law as it awaits the signature of President Ferdinand 'Bongbong' Marcos Jr.
Minority leader Senator Aquilino ‘Koko’ Pimentel III has called on Marcos to exercise his powers and veto the controversial measure for lawmakers to look into it again for the second time.
