Alvarez guilty of legislative estoppel: He never raised a finger on the 2025 national budget during approval

DAVAO del Norte Rep. Pantaleon Alvarez has neither the legal nor moral right to file graft charges against Speaker Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez in connection with the 2025 national budget since he never registered his complaint nor his allegations during the approval of the budget measure.

As a sitting member of the House, Alvarez had every opportunity to raise these concerns during the budget deliberations and approval process but did not, according to House Assistant Majority Leader and Taguig City Rep. Pammy Zamora.

“It’s very ironic that Mr. Alvarez barely participated in the non-stop budget hearings that we’ve had for the 2025 budget, whether sa committee level or sa plenary. Wala naman siyang ni-raise na concern,” Zamora said.

She emphasized that as an Assistant Majority Leader, she was consistently present on the session floor and seldom saw Alvarez raise any issues.

1-RIDER Party-list Rep. Rodge Gutierrez echoed Zamora’s sentiment, noting, “Kagaya nang sinabi po ni Cong. Pammy, we would always welcome and respect everyone’s right to seek redress, seek grievance before the court.”

“Tama naman po ‘yun kapag nakikita po natin na merong cause of action, pwede naman talaga tayo mag-file,” Gutierrez said.

However, he questioned the timing and venue of Alvarez’s complaint, suggesting that if the issue was genuinely about the law, it should have been raised earlier or filed before the Supreme Court.

“It’s just really questionable po personally without going into the context na may prior redress naman po in the House na hindi naman po naitanong,” Gutierrez noted.

He found it curious that the complaint was filed in a criminal venue rather than seeking clarification from the Supreme Court regarding legislative procedures.

House Majority Leader Manuel Jose “Mannix” M.
Dalipe of Zamboanga City earlier criticized Alvarez’s actions, pointing out that as a sitting member during the 2025 General Appropriations Bill deliberations, Alvarez “had every opportunity to raise objections, question allocations, and point out any supposed infirmities during plenary discussions. Yet, he did not.”

Dalipe emphasized that Alvarez’s silence during the legislative process and his sudden emergence as a complainant suggest political motivations behind the accusations.

The complaints filed by Alvarez and his co-complainants alleged that funds were inserted into the General Appropriations Act without proper inclusion in the bicameral conference committee report. They claim these insertions were not present in the report signed and approved by both House and Senate members.

However, Dalipe defended the House’s actions, stating that the approval of the national budget is a constitutional duty of Congress. He argued that the budget process undergoes thorough deliberations and scrutiny by both chambers before being transmitted to the president for final approval.