This report was prepared by consultants for the Asian ... · PDF fileJUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM...
Transcript of This report was prepared by consultants for the Asian ... · PDF fileJUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM...
This report was prepared by consultants for the Asian Development Bank. The views expressed in this report are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), or its Board of Governors, or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use.
CENTER FOR PUBLIC RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, INC.
THE ASIA FOUNDATION
NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS
ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES OF CANADA
SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES
ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
REVISED FINAL REPORT
ADB TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE NO. 3693 - PHISTRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN
CYS 2006-2011
ADB TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE NO. 3693 - PHISTRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE
AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
REVISED FINAL REPORT
DECEMBER 2004
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
CYS 2006-2011
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 i REVISED FINAL REPORT
ACRONYMS
AAC Appraisal and Auction Committee
AARR Accrual Accounting Rate of Return
ADB Asian Development Bank
ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution
AFP Armed Forces of the Philippines
ABM Agency Budget Matrix
AGDB Authorized Government Depository Bank
AJS American Judicature Society
APJR Action Plan for Judicial Reform
ARMM Autonomous Region Of Muslim Mindanao
ASEAN Association of South East Asian Nations
ATA Automatic Transfer Agreement
BAC Bids and Awards Committee
BCDA Bases Conversion Development Authority
BOT Build-Operate-Transfer
BTr Bureau of Treasury
DBM - BESF Department of Budget and Management - Budget of Expenditures and Source of Financing
CA Court of Appeals
CCAO Central Court Administration Office
CDA Cash Disbursement Authority
CFMO Central Financial Management Office
CIDA Canadian International Development Agency
COA Commission on Audit
COB Committee on Bids
COMELEC Commission on Election
CMO Court Management Office
CPI Consumer Price Index
CSC Civil Service Commission
CTA Court of Tax Appeals
DBM Department of Budget and Management
DCF Discounted Cash Flow
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 ii REVISED FINAL REPORT
DLS Department of Logistical Support
ENG L’Ecole Nationale des Greffes
FMBO Fiscal Management and Budget Office
FMO Financial Management Office
GSIS Government Service Insurance System
HOJ Halls of Justice
HRD Human Resource Development
IBP Integrated Bar of the Philippines
ICM Institute for Court Management
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IRA Internal Revenue Allocation
IRR Internal Rate of Return
ISSP Information Systems Strategic Plan
JBC Judicial & Bar Council
JDF Judicial Development Fund
JLSO Judicial Library Service Office
JSPC Judiciary Strategic Planning Committee
JTF Judicial Trust Fund
JTFD Judicial Development Trust Fund Division
JUSIP Judicial System Infrastructure Program
KPI Key Performance Indicators
KRA Key Reform Area
LAN Local Area Network
LEGO Legal Office
LDP Land Bank of the Philippines
LGU Local Government Unit
MCTC Municipal Circuit Trial Court
MCLE Mandatory Continuing Legal Education
MR Memorandum Receipt
MDS Modified Disbursement System
MDSO Medical and Dental Services Office
MISO Management Information System Office
MeTC Metropolitan Trial Court
MTC Municipal Trial Court
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 iii REVISED FINAL REPORT
NCA Notice of Cash Allocation
NCC National Computer Center
NCR National Capital Region
NEDA National Economic Development Authority
NG National Government
NGAS New Government Accounting System
NPV Net Present Value
NSO National Statistics Office
OAS Office of Administrative Services
OCA Office of the Court Administrator
OCA - FMO Office of the Court Administrator – Financial Management Office
OCJ Office of the Chief Justice
ODA Official Development Assistance
OU Oversight Unit
PEAC Prequalification, Evaluation and Awards Committee for Consultancy
PERA Personnel Emergency Relief Allowance
PET Presidential Electoral Tribunal
PHILJA Philippine Judicial Academy
PO Purchase Order
PMO Program Management Office
RATA Representation and Transportation Allowance
RCAO Regional Court Administration Office
RIV Request for Issuance of Voucher
RMO Revenue Management Office
RMS Revenue Management System
RMSD Revenue Management System Database
RPC Regional Procurement Committee
RRR Required Rate of Return
RTC Regional Trial Court
SB Sandiganbayan
SC Supreme Court of the Philippines
SC-FMBO Supreme Court- Financial Management Office
SCHWP Supreme Court Health and Welfare Plan
SCPES Supreme Court Performance Evaluation System
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 iv REVISED FINAL REPORT
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
SG Salary Grade
SHCC Shari’a Circuit Trial Court
SHDC Shari’a District Trial Court
SPAMS Supply, Property Accountability and Monitoring System
SPB-LC Selection and Promotion Board for the Lower Courts
SSL Salary Standardization Law
SWOT Strengths - Weaknesses – Opportunities – Threats
TA Technical Assistance
TACC Total Annual Cash Compensation
TS Technical Secretariat
TCAA Treasury and Cash Administration
TCPS Trial Court Performance Standards and Measurements Program
TOR Terms of Reference
TQM Total Quality Management
TWG Technical Working Group
WB World Bank
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Program
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 v REVISED FINAL REPORT
CONTENTS Section 1 INTRODUCTION 1 Background ..................................................................................................................1
2 Background ..................................................................................................................1
Section 2 EXPENDITURE PLANNING METHODOLOGY 1 General Planning Procedure ........................................................................................3
2 Derivation of Expected Expenditure Trends .................................................................3 Section 3 PROPOSED ANNUAL EXPENDITURE ESTIMATES CYC 2006 - 20011 1 Assumptions.................................................................................................................7
2 Medium-Term Estimates (2006 – 2011) .....................................................................11
3 Annual Estimates .......................................................................................................13
LIST OF TABLES Table 1 National Government Budget CYs 1998 – 2003 (in thousand PhP) ....................................4 Table 2 Comparative Statement Of The Personal Services Budget Of The National Government And Judiciary’s Budget Share CYs 1998 – 2003 (in thousand PhP)................................................................................................................5 Table 3 Judiciary Budget Support From The National Government with PS, MOOE and CO Shares CYs 1998 – 2003 (in thousand PhP)................................................................................................................5 Table 4 Judiciary Proposed Expenditures CY 2005 National Expenditures Program in thousand PhP).................................................................................................................7 Table 5 Strategic Plan Budgetary Requirements CY 2006 – 2011 (in Thousand PhP) ...........................................................................................................11 Table 6 Computation Of Budgetary Requirements Enhancement Level, CYs 2006 – 2011 (Option 1) in thousand PhP...................................................................13 Table 7 Computation Of The CY 2006 Minimum Or Baseline Budget Level (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................14 Table 8 Computation Of The CY 2006 Current Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................14 Table 9 Computation Of CY 2006 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................15
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 vi REVISED FINAL REPORT
Table 10 Computation Of CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates (in thousand PhP).............................................................................................................16 Table 11 Revenue Estimates, Cy 2006 – 2011 (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................16 Table 12 Reconciliation Of CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2006 Revenue Estimates .....................................................................................16 Table 13 Revised CY 2006 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................17 Table 14 Computation Of Revised CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates................................................18 Table 15 Computation Of Budgetary Requirements Enhancement Level, CYs 2006 – 2011, Option 2 (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................18 Table 16 CY 2006 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements, (Option 2) (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................19 Table 17 Computation Of Revised CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates (Option 2)...............................20 Table 18 Estimated Revenues For CY 2007 ....................................................................................21 Table 19 Computation Of CY 2007 Minimum Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................21 Table 20 Computation Of CY 2007 Current Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................22 Table 21 Computation Of CY 2007 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................22 Table 22 Computation Of CY 2007 Expenditure Estimates (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................23 Table 23 Reconciliation Of CY 2007 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2007 Revenue Estimates .....................................................................................23 Table 24 Revised CY 2007 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................23 Table 25 Computation Of Revised CY 2007 Expenditure Estimates (1st Iteration) .................................................................................24 Table 26 Computation Of CY 2008 Minimum Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................24 Table 27 Computation Of CY 2008 Current Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................25 Table 28 Computation Of CY 2008 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................25 Table 29 Computation Of CY 2008 Expenditure Estimates (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................25
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 vii REVISED FINAL REPORT
Table 30 Reconciliation Of CY 2008 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2008 Revenue Estimates (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................26 Table 31 Revised CY 2008 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................26 Table 32 Computation Of Revised CY 2008 Expenditure Estimates (1st Iteration)............................... Table 33 Computation Of CY 2009 Minimum Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................27 Table 34 Computation Of CY 2009 Current Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................27 Table 35 Computation Of CY 2009 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................27 Table 36 Computation Of CY 2009 Expenditure Estimates (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................28 Table 37 Reconciliation Of CY 2009 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2009 Revenue Estimates (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................28 Table 38 Revised CY 2009 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................28 Table 39 Computation Of Revised CY 2009 Expenditure Estimates (1st Iteration)...........................29 Table 40 Computation Of CY 2010 Minimum Level Expenditure Requirements ..............................29 Table 41 Computation Of CY 2010 Current Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................29 Table 42 Computation Of CY 2010 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................30 Table 43 Computation Of CY 2010 Expenditure Estimates (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................30 Table 44 Reconciliation Of CY 2010 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2010 Revenue Estimates (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................30 Table 45 Revised CY 2010 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................31 Table 46 Computation Of Revised CY 2010 Expenditure Estimates (1st Iteration)...........................31 Table 47 Computation Of CY 2011 Minimum Level Expenditure Requirements ..............................32 Table 48 Computation Of CY 2011 Current Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................32 Table 49 Computation Of CY 2011 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................32
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 viii REVISED FINAL REPORT
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
Table 50 Computation Of CY 2011 Expenditure Estimates (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................33 Table 51 Reconciliation Of CY 2011 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2011 Revenue Estimates (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................33 Table 52 Revised CY 2011 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................33 Table 53 Computation Of Revised CY 2011 Expenditure Estimates (1st Iteration) (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................34 Table 54 Proposed Judiciary Six – Year Expenditure Program, CY 2006 - 2011 (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................35 Table 55 Judiciary Expenditure Program For CYs 2006 – 2011 (in thousand PhP)..............................................................................................................35
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 1 REVISED FINAL REPORT
1 INTRODUCTION
I BACKGROUND 1.1.1 The Action Plan on Judicial Reform (APJR) identifies and programs the various
reform initiatives that will be undertaken over a six-year period in order to achieve the Judiciary’s vision of a speedy, impartial and fair justice system, within the context of an independent and accountable Judiciary. Investments of an estimated amount of over PhP 3.4 billion will be required over the implementation period. These are one-time public investments and will be incurred in addition to the current budgetary levels of the Judiciary. The APJR comprises the strategic plan of the Judiciary which includes other projects funded locally or through technical assistance in the next 6 years.
1.1.2 Also the implementation reforms will have significant impacts on the annual
budgetary requirements of the Judiciary. Significant improvements in the overall levels and internal allocation in the annual Judiciary budget is critical to implementing quality reforms and in sustaining the gains over the long – term horizon.
1.1.3 It is on this broad approach that this medium-term expenditure program is presented
in this report. In particular, it presents annual expenditure level projections for the Judiciary in the next six years assuming full implementation of the APJR and considering the budgetary impacts of their implementation over the medium-term.
2 OBJECTIVES 2.1.1 The medium-term expenditure program has the following objectives:
a) To improve the prescience of the Judiciary budgeting system thereby providing reliable guidance in resource management as the Judiciary navigates through the medium-term change process.
b) To provide a medium-term budget perspective that will enable the Judiciary to
link plans with resource availabilities as well as requirements. c) To establish the basis for the annual monitoring, evaluation and update of the
plan implementation on the one hand, and resource generation and allocation on the other thereby support better reform management and regular operations within the context of a reforming organization.
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 2 REVISED FINAL REPORT
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 3 REVISED FINAL REPORT
2 EXPENDITURE PLANNING
METHODOLOGY 1 GENERAL PLANNING PROCEDURE
1.1.1 The medium-term or six –year expenditure program is an estimation of the cost of
plan implementation, with annual cost estimates for the six – year period. Its formulation is anchored on a set of objectives and strategies, as well as, annual performance targets and priorities as contained in the Judiciary Strategic Plan (with the Action Program for Judiciary Reform integrated therein) which is updated annually.
1.1.2 The preparation of the medium-term program is done annually, and involves a three-
step process, namely:
a) Determination of the recurring expenditures in the current year budget;
b) Making adjustments thereon for provisions for terminal leave, pensions for prospective retirees, and other mandatory or urgent budgetary requirements, and for percentage change in relevant macro-economic parameters; and
c) Determination of the annual budgetary requirements of the approved annual plans, priorities and performance targets for the plan period (in this specific case, six years) as set forth in the updated Judiciary Strategic Plan.
2 DERIVATION OF EXPECTED EXPENDITURE TRENDS 2.1.1 The magnitude of the budgetary requirements to be set up annually is a function of
the current year recurring expenditures and needed adjustments thereon, and the plans, priorities and performance targets approved by Judiciary top-level officials on the one hand, and the level of expected resources availability for the indicated budget year. The disaggregation of the resources expected to be generated during the years of the plan period into the various expenditure classes, functions, activities, programs and projects and decentralized units needs to be planned and targeted by the CFMO based on, among others, the above factors.
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 4 REVISED FINAL REPORT
2.1.2 CY 2006 shall be the initial year of budget reform implementation. Because this will be the first year that the Judiciary will be preparing its budget within the context of operationalized judicial autonomy. Because it does not have yet a Judiciary-approved budget, the determination of the current year recurring expenditures and its budget disaggregations will be based on the proposed expenditures for the Judiciary of the national government under the CY 2005 National Expenditures Program. An analysis of such budget disaggregations shall be made as a starting point to enable the rational planning and the targeting of improvements to be made on the preparation of the Judiciary medium-term expenditure program.
2.1.3 Table 1 presents the national government budget for CYs 1998-2003. As can be
gleaned from Table 1, the budget has grown by an annual average of 8.51 percent. The Personal Services (PS) component, on the other hand, registered a slower growth, averaging 6.07 percent. As a percentage of the national government budget, Personal Services has displayed a decreasing trend, averaging an annual growth of 35.6 per cent for the six – year period from a higher 38.22 percent share in 1998.
TABLE 1 NATIONAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET
CYs 1998 – 2003 (in thousand PhP)
YEAR TOTAL NG BUDGET
Annual % Growth
TOTAL NG PS
Annual % Growth
PS % Share In NG
Budget
1998 537,433,273 205,430,213 38.22
1999 580,385,020 7.98 215,351,726 4.83 37.10
2000 682,459,835 117.60 235,248,659 9.24 34.47
2001 707,093,084 3.61 247,665,401 5.28 35.03
2002 769,804,730 8.87 265,497,127 7.20 34.49
2003 804,200,000 4.47 275,577,322 3.80 34.27
Average annual % growth 8.51 6.07 35.60
2.1.4 In contrast, national government budget support to the Judiciary for the same period
displayed an average annual growth of 3.4 percent as shown in Table 2, much lower than the average annual growth of 8.51 percent of the national government budget. The average annual growth of the budget support to the Judiciary represents only about 40 percent of the average annual growth of the national government budget.
2.1.5 Personal Services of the national government registered an average annual growth
of 6.07 percent for the six-year period. In the case of the Judiciary, national government budget support for personal services averaged an annual growth of only 4.57 percent, or 1.5 percent slower.
2.1.6 For the past six years, the national government’s personal services budget averaged
35.6 percent of its total budget. National government budget support for personal services in the Judiciary presents a stark contrast with personal services share in the total budget support registering an average of 85.28 percent. This signifies that the
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 5 REVISED FINAL REPORT
bulk of the budget support goes to the payment of salaries and personnel benefits, with only a meager of less than 15 percent of the budget provided for maintenance and other operating expenses and capital outlays. This, however, does not mean that the salary rates and personnel benefits in the Judiciary are at ideal levels. It only means that the total budget support to the Judiciary can provide only the very basic requirements, such as the payment of legislated salaries and prescribed benefits in the civil service, and the barest of maintenance and other operating expenses.
TABLE 2
Comparative Statement of the Personal Services Budget of the National Government and Judiciary’s Budget Share
CYs 1998 – 2003 (in thousand PhP)
YEAR
NG BUDGET SUPPORT TO JUDICIARY
BS TO JUD
ANNUAL %
GROWTH
TOTAL NG PS BUDGET
ANNUAL %
GROWTH JUDICIARY PS BUDGET
ANNUAL %
GROWTH
JUD. % SHARE IN
NG PS BUDGET
1998 6,446,803 205,430,213 5,397,423 2.63
1999 6,713,681 4.14 215,351,726 4.83 5,708,179 5.76 2.65
2000 7,044,109 4.92 235,248,659 9.24 5,831,678 2.16 2.48
2001 7,433,798 5.53 247,665,401 5.28 6,118,818 4.92 2.47
2002 7,651,214 2.92 265,497,027 7.20 6,853,974 12.01 2.58
2003 7,611,626 -0.52 275,577,322 3.80 6,716,674 -2.00 2.44
Average Annual % Growth 3.40 6.07 4.57 2.54
TABLE 3 Judiciary Budget Support from the National Government
with PS, MOOE and CO Shares CYs 1998 – 2003
(in thousand PhP)
YEAR NG BUDGET SUPPORT TO JUDICIARY
TOTAL PS PS %
SHARE IN BUDGET
SUPPORT
TOTAL MOOE
MOOE % SHARE IN
BS
TOTAL CO
CO % SHARE IN
BS
1998 6,446,803 5,397,423 83.72 968,430 15.02 80,950 1.50
1999 6,713,681 5,708,179 85.02 922,970 13.75 82,532 1.23
2000 7,044,109 5,831,678 82.79 1,162,381 16.50 50,050 0.71
2001 7,433,798 6,118,818 82.31 1,246,660 16.77 68,320 0.92
2002 7,651,214 6,853,974 89.58 682,647 8.92 114,593 1.50
2003 7,611,626 6,716,674 88.24 754,461 9.91 140,491 1.85
Average Annual % Growth 85.28 13.48 1.28
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 6 REVISED FINAL REPORT
2.1.7 The above analysis shows the minimal concern for the maintenance requirements and the improvement and upgrading of facilities, equipment and other capital assets of the various courts in the country. Given this budget disaggregation for expense classes, it is necessary at the outset for the CFMO to target improvements in budget allocation in tandem with the expected increases in revenue generation even prior to the translation of approved annual plans, priorities and performance targets into budgetary requirements, and the preparation and submission of budget proposals by decentralized units.
2.1.8 Given the above average breakdown by expense class of the Judiciary budget for
the past six (6) years, it is desirable to gradually introduce budget allocation improvements in its medium-term expenditure program for CYs 2006 - 2011. Granted that the total resource budgeting approach is adopted, the following budget disaggregation among expense classes is proposed for the six – year period:
1st 3 Years 2nd 3 Years
Personal Services 80.0% 75.0%
Maintenance and other Operating Expenses 15.0% 15.0%
Capital Outlays 5.0% 10.0% 2.1.9 The above budget disaggregation will serve to guide the allocation of annual
expenditures during the reform period, thus preventing the concentration of additionally-generated resources for increased Personal Services, but instead spread the same over the three expense classes to take care of the budgetary requirements for salary and personnel benefit increases, maintenance and other operating requirements and capital outlays.
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 7 REVISED FINAL REPORT
3 PROPOSED ANNUAL EXPENDITURE
ESTIMATES CYS 2006 - 2011 1 ASSUMPTIONS 1.1 Base year 1.1.1 CY 2006 shall be considered as Year 1 or the initial year of budget reform
implementation. Thus, CY 2005 will represent the current year and will considered as the base year for purposes of estimating the ensuing 6-year requirements. However, in the absence of a Judiciary – approved budget and the CY 2005 General Appropriations Act (GAA), we shall consider the proposed Judiciary expenditures under the CY 2005 National Expenditures Program as basis for the computation of the recurring current year expenditures. For this design report and computation purposes, the summary of these Judiciary expenditures for CY 2005 are presented hereunder:
TABLE 4
Judiciary Proposed Expenditures CY 2005 National Expenditures Program
(in thousand PhP)
AGENCIES PS MOOE CO TOTAL
SCP/LCs 6,303,073 837,342 3,026 7,143,441
PET 37,897 11,971 132 50,000
Sandiganbayan 93,860 27,541 82,793 204,194
CA 437,182 106,879 2,527 546,588
CTA 32,784 16,599 11,600 60,983
TOTAL BUDGET 6,904,796 1,000,332 100,078 8,005,206
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 8 REVISED FINAL REPORT
1.2 Judiciary Strategic Plans, APJR Programs and Priorities for the Medium-Term
1.2.1 The annual strategic plans, programs and priorities for the plan period (2006 – 2011)
contains the following programs and priorities inclusive of those contained in the Action Program for Judicial Reform (APJR) and the reform proposals of the ADB TA 3693 STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY:
ACTION PROGRAM FOR JUDICIAL REFORM
a. Locally – funded Projects
b. GOP Peso-Counterpart of Foreign-assisted Projects
ADB TA 3693 REFORM PROPOSALS
a. Creation of new offices and required positions to implement the reforms
b. Improvement in compensation and personnel benefits of judicial personnel
c. Improvement in compensation and personnel benefits of non-judicial personnel based on specific personnel administration reform proposal and legislation
d. Provision of standard MOOE and equipment requirements for the offices to be created.
BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS
a. The various budgetary requirements for personal services, maintenance and other operating expenses and capital outlays shall be within the annual estimated revenues for the plan period, which for purposes of this medium-term expenditure projection will be at the average level.
b. Revenue generation efforts will be maximized and optimized to enable the generation of the projected estimated revenues. However, in case revenue and cash shortfalls occur, mechanisms which have been set-up in the proposed budgeting system shall be implemented during budget execution to ensure that obligations and disbursements will be made only with cash back-up.
c. In case the total estimated revenues cannot fully support the budgetary requirements of the approved annual plans, programs and priorities, the implementation pace of the reform proposals as recommended by concerned consultants will be adjusted to supportable levels but shall ensure completion of said reform proposals within the plan period. Budgetary allocation among the approved plans, programs and priorities shall be prioritized as follows:
c.1 GOP peso-counterpart requirements of APJR
c.2 Budgetary requirements for creation of new offices and positions, and improvements in compensation of judicial and non-judicial personnel, and
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 9 REVISED FINAL REPORT
their corresponding personnel benefits. In this regard, budgetary requirements for impact mitigation of personnel to be adversely affected by reorganization/ restructuring is also a priority.
c.3 Budgetary requirements for maintenance and other operating expenses of offices to be created and lower courts
c.4 Provision of standard basic equipment to offices to be created and to court branches and court stations
c.5 APJR budgetary requirements of locally-funded projects
1.3 Specific budget assumptions PERSONAL SERVICES 1.3.1 The medium-term expenditure program estimates for personnel services are based
on the following assumptions:
a. The staffing pattern of the court stations, special courts and appellate courts and the attached agencies (JBC and PhilJA) will be maintained at present levels. At the Supreme Court Proper, however, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) and the Financial Management and Budget Office (FMBO) will be abolished. In place of these two (2) offices, the Central Court Administrator Office (CCAO) and the Central Financial Management Office will be created. At the regional level, the Regional Court Administrator Office will be created in each of the identified nineteen (19) regional decentralized units.
b. The corresponding personal services requirements of new offices shall be
computed based on the new positions to be created and their authorized salary grade and basic monthly salary. On the other hand, personnel benefits shall be computed based on the ratio and proportion of salaries and personnel benefits to the total personal services budget in CY 2002. The resulting percentage share of personnel benefits to authorized salaries shall be applied to the total authorized salaries of the offices to be created. (Refer to the section on Staffing of this detailed design report for the computation of the personal services requirements of the offices proposed to be created.)
c. The realization of savings in personal services and maintenance and other
operating expenses is assumed from the abolition of the two (2) offices in the Supreme Court, and the creation of the CCAO, CFMO and RCAOs. Savings shall be computed based on authorized salaries under the CY 2002 budget of the Supreme Court and Lower Courts. (Computation of savings is presented in Annex 1).
d. Improvement in compensation and personnel benefits of judicial personnel will
have as beneficiaries all personnel holding positions whose functions involve the direct performance or rendition of adjudication services such as judges and justices, and will not reckon with mere qualifications. (Refer to the section on Judicial Remuneration of this detailed design report.
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 10 REVISED FINAL REPORT
e. Improvement in compensation and personnel benefits of non-judicial personnel
will be a two-tiered process. Non-judicial personnel performing adjudication support functions will be provided with improved compensation based on the proposed broad banding similar to the mode adopted for judicial personnel. (See Personnel Management section of this detailed design report). The implementation of improved levels of compensation for the rest of the non-judicial personnel will be subject to legislation. On the other hand, provision of additional or increased personnel benefits to all non-judicial personnel will also be subject to legislation, as well as , Judiciary action. In both cases, a lump sum amount shall be provided to cover the prospective requirements. The amount provided is not based on any formula but mere estimate.
f. Budgetary provisions for terminal leave and pensions will assume a 10 percent
increase over the CY 2005 level, and every year thereafter. Inflation is assumed to grow annually at 5 per cent from year 1 to year 6.
MAINTENANCE AND OTHER OPERATING EXPENSIES (MOOE) 1.3.2 Medium-term estimates for MOOE are based on the following assumptions;
a. Maintenance and other operating expenses will be provided for new offices and
court stations. This will be computed at 20 percent of the computed PS requirements as presented in the proposed staffing pattern. The same percentage shall be applied to the PS appropriation of lower courts under the CY 2002 General Appropriations Act (GAA) to derive the MOOE requirement of the lower courts. The 20 per cent MOOE allocation of these courts under this reform proposal shall exclude the proposed MOOE allocations under the CY 2005 National Expenditure Program (NEP). The rest of the agencies/offices not subjected to restructuring will maintain their respective NG proposed expenditure levels under the CY 2005 NEP.
CAPITAL OUTLAYS (CO) 1.3.3 Medium term estimates on CO were derived based on the following assumptions:
a. Except for the offices to be created and the lower courts, and the built-in requirements of programs and projects lined-up in the Strategic Plan programs and priorities, there will be no capital outlay provision under the plan period. Whatever capital outlays shall be provided will be in accordance with actual needs and criteria to be developed for the purpose. (See Physical Assets Management section of this detailed design report.)
b. Budgetary requirements of programs and projects included under the APJR
that will be provided in the medium-term expenditure program will be limited to the requirements of locally-funded projects and GOP peso-counterparts. Budgetary requirements for loan and grant proceeds were not included since these will be provided by financial institutions concerned through the national government. The amounts provided for each year of the plan period will reconcile with the annual program requirements as presented in the APJR.
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 11 REVISED FINAL REPORT
2 MEDIUM-TERM ESTIMATES (2006-2011)
2.1.1 The translation of the proposed plans, programs and priorities for the Strategic Plan for CY 2006 - 2011 includes the following budgetary requirements. These will be presented under the enhancement level of budgetary requirements of the Judiciary for the plan period covered.
TABLE 5
STRATEGIC PLAN BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS CY 2006 – 2011
(in thousand PhP)
BUDGETARY REQUIREMENTS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
ENHANCEMENT LEVEL:
1. Staffing of new offices: - Salaries of new positions - Personnel Benefits - Impact Mitigation
200,656 50,164 89,178
200,656 50,164 89,178
2. Increase in compensation: - Judicial personnel Salary adjustment Variable Pay Fund - Non-judicial personnel - Fund for Legislated Compensation
Increases of Non-Judicial personnel
543,976 133,224 162,500
500,000
543.976 133,224 162,500
500,000
3. Improvement in personnel benefits: - Judicial personnel - Non-judicial personnel
562,921 132,551
562,921 132,551
4. Maintenance and other operating expenses: - New offices - Lower Courts - PHILJA Training Expenses
45,848 931,027
17,989
45,848 931,027
17,989
5. Equipment requirements: - New offices - Lower Courts
110,119 2,606,610
110,119 2,606,610
6. APJR Budgetary requirements: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterpart
2,046,052
960,460
2,046,052
960,460
7. Infrastructure Program Budgetary requirements: - Renovation and refurbishing - New Construction (HOJ)
1,506,690 12,332,412
1,506,690 12,332,412
TOTAL, ENHANCEMENT LEVEL CY 2006 – 2011 2,375,170 994,864 19,562,343 22,932,377
2.1.2 Given the total budgetary requirements under the enhancement level, the next step
is to allocate the various budgetary requirements among the six years of the plan period (according to the ranking of these priorities as decided upon by top-level officials during strategic planning workshops conducted for the purpose) to enable the Judiciary to attain its goals, objectives priorities and performance targets. Without the benefit of such priority ranking as basis for allocation, it would be
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 12 REVISED FINAL REPORT
advisable to venture on such priority ranking by taking into consideration the various issues and concerns observed in diagnostics exercises and dialogues.
2.1.3 Moreover, given the total budgetary requirements of more than P22.9B, and the
current level of resources available to the Judiciary, it would be rational to decide on staggered implementation of the various reform proposals as recommended by concerned consultants. The determination of the implementation pace will consider the need for the reform and the availability of resources, and the degree of certainty of collection of revenue estimates.
2.1.4 The increase in personal services and maintenance and other operating expenses
arising from the creation of new offices and positions will have to be provided in year 1. The provision of an Impact Mitigation Fund to shoulder terminal leave, retirement gratuity and other benefit requirements of personnel who will be adversely affected by reorganization will be provided in Year 1 since only eleven (11) months has been provided for employees to decide on whether to apply for the newly created positions in the new offices or to retire.
2.1.5 The pace of implementation of the improvement in compensation and personnel
benefits of both judicial and non-judicial personnel was staggered for three years as proposed, except for the lump sum funds provided for any legislated compensation and/or personnel benefit increases for non-judicial personnel.
2.1.6 Provision of the MOOE requirements of newly created offices will be provided in year
1 while the increased provision for lower courts was likewise staggered for three years.
2.1.7 The same principle was adopted in the programming of equipment requirements.
Requirements of new offices will be provided in year 1, while those of lower courts was staggered for 3 years.
2.1.8 The annual budgetary provision for the APJR faithfully complied with the earlier
computed annual requirements of locally-funded projects and the required GOP peso-counterparts of foreign-assisted projects (both for loans and grants).
2.1.9 Programming of the Budgetary Requirements under the Enhancement Level during
the 6-year plan period is presented as follows:
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 13 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 6 Computation of Budgetary Requirements
Enhancement Level, CYs 2006 – 2011 (Option 1) (in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 TOTAL
1. Increase in PS due to creation of offices and positions 250,820 0 0 0 0 0 250,820
2 Impact mitigation for personnel affected by restructuring/
reorganization
89,178 0 0 0 0 0 89,178
3 Improvement in compensation: - Judicial personnel Salary adjustment Variable Pay Fund - Non-judicial personnel - Fund for legislated
compensation Increases of Non-judicial personnel
181,326 44,408
54,251 125,000
181,325 44,408
54,251 125,000
181,325 44,408
54,251 125,000
0 0
0 125,000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
543,976 133,224
162,753 500,000
4. Improvement in personnel benefits: - Judicial personnel - Non-judicial personnel - Lump sum Fund for non-
judicial personnel
187,640 10,850
25,000
187,640 10,850
25,000
187,641 10,851
25,000
0 0
25,000
0 0
0
0 0
0
562,921 32,551
100,000
5. Requirements for MOOE: - New offices - Lower courts - PHILJA requirements for
training expenses
45,848 310,342 2,780
0 310,342
2,754
0 310,343
2,754
0 0 2,754
0 0 3,980
0 0 2,967
45,848 931,027 17,989
6. Requirements for equipment: - New offices - Lower courts
110,119 868,870
0 868,870
0 868,870
0 0
0 0
0 0
110,119 2,606,610
7. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
8,613 55,522
427,311 307,754
393,765 144,385
399,617 126,636
406,070 68,628
410,.677 57,536
2,046,053 760,461
8. Infrastructure Program Budget Requirements: - Renovation/Refurb - New HOJ Const.
502,230 2,222,069
502,230 2,222,069
502,230 2,222,069
0 2,222,069
0
2,222,068
0
2,222,068
1,506,690 13,332.412
Total Enhancement Level Budgetary Requirements 5,094, 866 5,279,804 5,062,892 2,901,076 2,700,746 2,693,248 23,732,632
Savings due to abolished and of unfilled positions 1,059 0 0 0 0 0 1,059
3 ANNUAL ESTIMATES 3.1 CY 2006 3.1.1 As previously discussed, the CY 2005 proposed expenditures of the Judiciary under
the CY 2005 NEP shall be the starting point for the calculation of the CY 2006 minimum level or baseline budget of the Judiciary. For the determination of its recurring expenses for the year, these expenditures shall net out expenses which are considered as non-recurring such terminal leave and pensions, as well as, provisions
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 14 REVISED FINAL REPORT
for capital outlays. Savings due to abolished and unfilled/vacant positions will be deducted from the amount computed as recurring expenses. This consists of personal services and MOOE resulting from the proposed reorganization/ restructuring. Table 7 reflects such computation.
TABLE 7 Computation of the CY 2006 Minimum or Baseline Budget Level
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2005 Budget per NEP as CY 2005 recurring expenditures
6,904,796 1,000,332 100,078 8,005,206
Less: Non-Recurring Expenses: - Terminal Leave - Pensions - Capital Outlays
221,450 334,194
100,078
221,450 334,194 100,078
CY 2006 Recurring Expenses 6,349,152 1,000,332 0 7,349,484
Less: Computed Savings due to abolished and unfilled positions
1,040,859 17,672 0 1,040,859
CY 2006 MINIMUM LEVEL 5,308,293 982,660 0 6,290,953
3.1.2 The next step is to compute the CY 2006 current level expenditure requirements.
This involves the provision of adjustments in the CY 2006 minimum level of expenditures for terminal leave and pensions for retiring employees/officials in CY 2006 and increase in the price of maintenance and other operating expenses due to inflation (5%).
TABLE 8 Computation of the CY 2006 Current Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2006 Minimum Level 5,308,293 982,660 0 6,290,953
Add: Adjustments: - Terminal Leave - Pensions - 5% increase for Inflation
243,595 367,713
49,133
243,595 367,713
49,133
CY 2006 Current Level 5,919,601 1,031,793 0 6,951,394
3.1.3 The current level of expenditure requirements will then be adjusted for budgetary
requirements classified under the Enhancement Level. These will consist of the budgetary requirements of proposed reforms under the ADB TA No. 3693 inclusive of the creation of new offices and abolition/restructuring of some existing offices, improvements
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 15 REVISED FINAL REPORT
in the compensation and personnel benefits of both judicial and non-judicial personnel, the provision of increased budgetary levels for maintenance and other operating expenses and equipment for new offices and lower courts, provisions for the Action Program for Judicial Reform and infrastructure program requirements of Judicial Regions with unorganized courts. Table 9 presents the CY 2006 expenditure requirements under the enhancement level.
TABLE 9
Computation of CY 2006 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1 Increase in PS due to creation of offices and positions 250,820 250,820
2 Impact mitigation for personnel affected by restructuring 89,178 89,178
3 Improvement in compensation: - Judicial personnel : Salary Adjustment Variable Pay - Non-judicial personnel : Salary Adjustment Fund for legislated compensation increases
181,326 44,408
54,251
125,000
181,326 44,408
54,251
125,000
4 Improvement in personnel benefits: - Judicial personnel - Non-judicial personnel : Lump sum Fund for any other increases
187,640
10,850 25,000
187,640
10,850 25,000
5 Requirements for MOOE: - New offices - Lower courts - PHILJA training expenses
45,848
310,342 2,780
45,848 310,342
2,780
6 Requirements for equipment: - New offices - Lower courts
110,119 868,870
110,119
868,870
7 Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
8,613
55,522
8,613 55,522
8. Infrastructure Program requirements - Renovation,refurbishings - New Construction (HOJ)
502,230
2,222,069
502,230
2,222,069
CY 2006 Enhancement Level 968,473 358,970 3,767,423 5,094,866
3.1.4 The next step is to add the estimated expenditure requirements for each of the three
alternative levels (See Table 10) and compare and reconcile the total for personal services, maintenance and other operating expenses, and capital outlays with the target budget allocations of the projected revenues for the same period (See Table 12). For purposes of this exercise, the projections of annual revenue estimates for the six – year plan period are contained in Table 11.. (Refer to Revenue Management section of this detailed design report for discussion of computation, etc.)
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 16 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 10 Computation of CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2006 Current Level 5,919,601 1,031,793 0 6,951,394
CY 2006 Enhancement Level 968,473 358,970 3,767,423 5,094,866
CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates 6,888,074 1,390,763 3,767,423 12,046,260
Percentage Share 57.18 11.55 31.27 100.00
Table 11 REVENUE ESTIMATES, CY 2006 – 2011
(in thousand PhP)
LEVEL OF COLLECTION CERTAINLY
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Minimum Level 13,457,342 14,062,924 14,695,754 15,357,058 16,048,126 16,770,292
Average Level 15,163,369 15,845,720 16,558,780 17,303,924 18,082,599 18,896,319
Maximum Level
20,221,575 21,131,553 22,082,473 23,076,183 24,114,608 25,199,768
TABLE 12 Reconciliation of CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2006 Revenue Estimates
EXPENSE CLASS CY 2006 TARGET BUDGET ALLOCATION
EST. REQUIRED EXPENDITURE DIFFERENCE
Personal Services-80% 12,130,695 6,888,074 5,242,621
MOOE – 10% 1,516,337 1,390,763 125,574
CO – 10% 1,516,337 3,767,423 (2,251,086)
TOTAL BUDGET-100% 15,163,369 12,046,260 3,117,109
3.1.5 The target expense class allocations shall be used as allocation limits in the
calculation of the annual expenditure estimates for the six – year annual expenditure program. Said estimation shall be made at three alternative levels, namely; minimum or baseline budget level, current level and enhancement or capacity building level, each level of which has been described at earlier discussions of the detailed design report. For purposes of these tabular illustrations, the revenue estimates under average level has been used.
3.1.6 In case target budget allocations exceed the estimated expenditure requirements in
any expense class, the excess shall either be applied to the budgetary requirements of the other expense classes in the order of PS to MOOE to CO, or provided as reserves to buffer potential cash shortfalls. On the other hand, if projected revenue
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 17 REVISED FINAL REPORT
estimates are not sufficient to cover the estimated expenditure requirements of each expense class, reconciliation of the revenue estimates and expenditure estimates shall be made through an iteration process with the use of prioritization criteria to be developed by CFMO. In such case, the revenue estimates may be projected upwards depending on the probability of collection certainty, or expenditure requirements will be prioritized in order to eliminate or drop those budgetary requirements with lower priority.
3.1.7 Any deviations between target budget allocations and estimated expenditure
requirements shall be reconciled. The final calculated estimates shall be inputted into the six – year expenditure program as the Year 1 or CY 2006 annual expenditures estimate. In the example above, the total projected revenue estimates exceed estimated expenditure requirements for the year by more than P3.1B. This may be attributed to the huge savings realized from the abolition of the OCA and FMBO in the Supreme Court and savings from unfilled/vacant positions that will no longer be filled up, and from some minimal amount of MOOE. However, expenditure requirements for capital outlays exceed their corresponding target budget allocations for the year by about P2.2B. In this specific case, the excess allocations for PS and MOOE shall be applied to cover the unfunded expenditure requirements of Capital Outlays. The net positive difference between target allocation of revenue estimates and expenditure estimates may further be utilized for either of the following: 1) to revise the pace of implementation of some of the budgetary items under the enhancement level, or 2) as a reserve for uncollected revenues and for other contingencies. (See Tables13 and 14).
TABLE 13
Revised CY 2006 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1 Increase in PS due to creation of offices and positions 250,820 250,820
2 Impact mitigation for personnel affected by restructuring 89,178
89,178
3 Improvement in compensation: - Judicial personnel : Salary Adjustment Variable pay - Non-judicial personnel : Salary Adjustment Fund for legislated compensation increases
181,326 44,408
54,251
125,000
181,326 44,408
54,251
125,000
4 Improvement in personnel benefits: - Judicial personnel - Non-judicial personnel - Lump sum Fund for any other increases
187,640
10,850 25,000
187,640
10,850 25,000
5 Requirements for MOOE: - New offices - Lower courts - PHILJA requirements for training expenses
45.848 310,342 2,780
45,848 310,342
2,780
6 Requirements for equipment: - New offices - Lower courts
110,119
868,870
110,119 868,870
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 18 REVISED FINAL REPORT
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
7. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
8,613
55,522
8,613
55,522
8. Infrastructure Program requirements - Renovation and refurbishings - New Construction (HOJ)
502,230
2,222,069
502,230
2,222,069
9. Reserve for Contingencies 3,117,109 3,117,109
Revised CY 2006 Enhancement Level 968,473 358,970 6,884,532 8,211,975
TABLE 14 Computation of Revised CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2006 Current Level 5,919,601 1,031,793 0 6,951,394
Revised CY 2006 Enhancement Level
968,473 358,970 6,884,532 8,211,975
CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates, as revised
6,888,074 1,390,763 6,884,532 15,163,369
Percentage Share 45.43 9.17 45.40 100.00
3.1.8 Table 15 presents the revised budgetary requirements under the enhancement level
for CYs 2006 – 2011 which improves the pace of implementation of improvements in compensation and personnel benefits for judicial and non-judicial personnel and MOOE provisions for lower courts. Table 16, on the other hand, presents the revised budgetary requirements under the enhancement level for CY 2006.
TABLE 15 Computation of Budgetary Requirements
Enhancement Level, CYs 2006 – 2011, Option 2 (in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 TOTAL
1. Increase in PS due to creation of offices and positions
250,820 0 0 0 0 0 250,820
2 Impact mitigation for personnel affected by restructuring/
reorganization
89,178 0 0 0 0 0 89,178
3 Improvement in compensation: - Judicial personnel Salary adjustment Variable pay - Non-judicial
personnel - Fund for
legislated compensation
271,988 66,612
81,377
250,000
271,988 66,612
81,376
250,000
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
543,976 133,224
162,753
500,000
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 19 REVISED FINAL REPORT
PARTICULARS YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 TOTAL
4. Improvement in personnel benefits:
- Judicial personnel - Non-judicial
personnel - Lump sum Fund
for non-judicial personnel
281,461
16,276
50,000
281,460
16,275
50,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
562,921
32,551
100,000
5. Requirements for MOOE: - New offices - Lower courts - PHILJA
requirements for training expenses
45,848 465,514 2,780
0 465,513
2,754
0 0
2,754
0 0 2,754
0 0 3,980
0 0 2,967
45,848 931,027 17,989
6. Requirements for equipment: - New offices - Lower courts
110,119 868,870
0 868,870
0 868,870
0 0
0 0
0 0
110,119 2,606,610
7. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded
projects - GOP Peso-
counterparts
8,613
55,522
427,311
307,754
393,765 144,385
399,617
126,636
406,070
68,628
410,.677
57,536
2,046,053
760,461
8. Infrastructure Program Budget Requirements:
- Renovation /Refurb
- New HOJ Const.
502,230
2,222,069
502,230
2,222,069
502,230
2,222,069
0
2,222,069
0
2,222,068
0
2,222,068
1,506,690
13,332.412
Total Enhancement Level Budgetary Rqmts 5,639,277 5,814, 212 4,134,073 2,751,076 2,700,746 2,693,248 23,732,632
Savings due to abolished and of unfilled positions 1,059 0 0 0 0 0 1,059
TABLE 16 CY 2006 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements, (Option 2)
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1 Increase in PS due to creation of offices and positions 250,820 250,820
2 Impact mitigation for personnel affected by restructuring 89,178
89,178
3 Improvement in compensation: - Judicial personnel : Salary Adjustment Variable pay - Non-judicial personnel : Salary Adjustment Fund for legislated compensation increases
271,988 66,612
81,377
250,000
271,988 66,612
81,377
250,000
4 Improvement in personnel benefits: - Judicial personnel - Non-judicial personnel - Lump sum Fund for any other increases
281,461
16,276 50,000
281,461
16,276 50,000
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 20 REVISED FINAL REPORT
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
5 Requirements for MOOE: - New offices - Lower courts - PHILJA requirements for training expenses
45.848 465,514 2,780
45,848 465,514
2,780
6 Requirements for equipment: - New offices - Lower courts
110,119
868,870
110,119 868,870
7. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
8,613
55,522
8,613
55,522
9. Infrastructure Program requirements - Renovation and refurbishings - New Construction (HOJ)
502,230
2,222,069
502,230
2,222,069
10.Reserve for Contingencies 2,572,698 2,572,698
Revised CY 2006 Enhancement Level 1,357,712 514,142 6,340,121 8,211,975
3.1.9 It will be noted from Table 17, that Personal Services has an increased percentage
share in total expenditure requirements as a result of the implementation of option 2. However, both options have not realized the target budget allocations among the three expense classes. This may be primarily attributed to the huge increase in revenue estimates to be used as the budget base which is almost twice the budget level in CY 2005.
TABLE 17 Computation of Revised CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates (Option 2)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2006 Current Level 5,919,601 1,031,793 0 6,951,394
Revised CY 2006 Enhancement Level
1,357,712 514,142 6,340,121 8,211,975
CY 2006 Expenditure Estimates, as revised
7,277,313 1,545,935 6,340,121 15,163,369
Percentage Share 47.99 10.20 41.81 100.00
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 21 REVISED FINAL REPORT
3.2 CY 2007 3.2.1 The estimated revenues for CY 2007 under the average level is Ph 15,845,720,000.
The target budget allocation by expense class based on this revenue estimate is as follows:
TABLE 18
Estimated Revenues for CY 2007
PARTICULARS % SHARE AMOUNT In thous PhP
Personal Services 80 12,676,576
Maintenance & Other Operating Expenses 10 1,584,572
Capital Outlays 10 1,584,572
Total 100 15,845,720
3.2.2 The estimation of Years 2 – 6 annual estimate of expenditures shall follow the same
procedures adopted in the computation of the Year 1 expenditure estimates. Provisions for personal services and maintenance and other operating expenses in year 1 that would recur in year 2 would not be netted out in the computation of the CY 2007 minimum or baseline budget level. The following tables present the computation of CY 2007 expenditure requirements under the three budget levels utilizing option 2.
TABLE 19
Computation of CY 2007 Minimum Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2006 total budget 7,277,313 1,545,935 6,340,121 15,163,369
Less: Non-recurring expenditures: Terminal Leave Pensions Lump sum for Impact Mitigation PHILJA Training Expenses Provision for Equipment: New offices Lower courts APJR budget requirements Locally-funded project GOP counterparts Infrastructure Program requirements Renovation and refurbishings New Construction (H)J) Reserve for Contingencies
243,595 367,713
89,178
2,780
110,119 868,870
8,613 55,522
502,230 2,222,069
2,572,698
243,595 367,713
89,178 2,780
110,119 868,870
8,613 55,522
502,230 2,222,069
2,572,698
CY 2007 Minimum Level 6,576,827 1,543,155 0 8,119,982
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 22 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 20 Computation of CY 2007 Current Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
Particulars PS MOOE CO Total
CY 2007 Minimum Level 6,576,827 1,543,155 0 8,119,982
Add: Adjustments: - Terminal Leave (10%
increase) - Pensions (10% increase) - Provision for Inflation (5%)
267,955 404,484
77,158
267,955 404,484
77,158
CY 2007 Current Level 7,249,266 1,620,313 0 8,869,579
TABLE 21 Computation of CY 2007 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1. Improvement in compensation: - Judicial personnel : Salary Adjustments Variable pay - Non-judicial personnel : Salary Adjustment - Fund for legislated compensation increases
271,988 66,612
81,376 250,000
271,988 66,612
81,376 250,000
2. Improvement in personnel benefits: - Judicial personnel - Non-judicial personnel Fund for any other increases
281,460
16,275 50,000
281,460
16,275 50,000
3. Requirements for MOOE: - Lower courts - PHILJA requirements for training expenses
465,513
2,754
465,513
2,754
4. Requirements for equipment: - Lower courts
868,870
868,870
5. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
427,311
307,754
427,311 307,754
6. Infrastructure Program requirements: - Renovation and refurbishings - New Construction (HOJ)
502,230
2,222,069
502,230
2,222,069
CY 2007 Enhancement Level 1,017,711 468,267 4,328,234 5,814,212
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 23 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 22 Computation of CY 2007 Expenditure Estimates
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2007 Current Level 7,249,266 1,620,313 0 8,869,579
CY 2007 Enhancement Level 1,017,711 468,267 4,328,234 5,814,212
CY 2007 Expenditure Estimate
8,266,977 2,088,580 4,328,234 14,683,791
Percentage Share 56.30 14.22 29.48 100.00
TABLE 23 Reconciliation of CY 2007 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2007 Revenue Estimates
EXPENSE CLASS CY 2007 TARGET
BUDGET ALLOCATION
EST. REQUIRED EXPENDITURES DIFFERENCE
Personal Services-80% 12,676,576 8,266,977 4,409,599
MOOE – 10% 1,584,572 2,088,580 (504,,008)
CO – 10% 1,584,572 4,328,234 (2,743,662)
TOTAL BUDGET-100% 15,845,720 14,683,791 1,161,929
TABLE 24 Revised CY 2007 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
Particulars PS MOOE CO Total
1. Improvement in compensation: - Judicial personnel : Salary Adjustments Variable pay - Non-judicial personnel : Salary Adjustment - Fund for legislated compensation increases
271,988 66,612
81,376 250,000
271,988 66,612
81,376 250,000
2. Improvement in personnel benefits: - Judicial personnel - Non-judicial personnel Fund for any other increases
281,460
16,275 50,000
281,460
16,275 50,000
3. Requirements for MOOE: - Lower courts - PHILJA requirements for training expenses
465,513
2,754
465,513
2,754
4. Requirements for equipment: - Lower courts
868,870
868,870
5. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
427,311
307,754
427,311 307,754
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 24 REVISED FINAL REPORT
Particulars PS MOOE CO Total
6. Infrastructure Program requirements: - Renovation and refurbishings - New Construction (HOJ)
502,230 2,222,069
502,230
2,222,069
9. Reserve for Contingencies 1,161,929 1,161,929
Revised CY 2007 Enhancement Level 1,017,711 468,267 5,490,163 6,976,141
TABLE 25 Computation of Revised CY 2007 Expenditure Estimates (1st Iteration)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2007 Current Level 7,249,266 1,620,313 0 8,869,579
Revised CY 2007 Enhancement Level 1,017,711 468,267 5,490,163 6,976,141
CY 2007 Expenditure Estimates, as revised 8,266,977 2,088,580 5,490,163 15,845,720
Percentage Share 52.17 13.18 34.65 100.00
3.3 CY 2008 3.3.1 The following tables present the computation of the expenditure requirements of CY
2008 in accordance with procedures adopted in the computation of CY 2006 expenditure requirements using option 2 of the enhancement level expenditure requirements.
TABLE 26
Computation of CY 2008 Minimum Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2007 total budget 8,266,977 2,088,580 5,490,163 15,845,720
Less: Non-recurring expenditures: - Terminal Leave - Pensions - PHILJA Training Exp - Capital Outlays Provisions
267,955 404,484
2,754
5,490,163
267,955 404,484
2,754
5,490,163
CY 2008 Minimum Level 7,594,538 2,085,826 0 9,680,364
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 25 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 27 Computation of CY 2008 Current Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2008 Minimum Level 7,594,538 2,085,826 0 9,680,364
Add: Adjustments: - Terminal Leave (10%
increase) - Pensions (10% inc.) - Provision for inflation (5%)
294,750 444,932
104,291
294,750 444,932
104,291
CY 2008 Current Level 8,334,220 2,190,117 0 10,524,337
TABLE 28 Computation of CY 2008 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1. Requirements for MOOE: - Lower courts - PHILJA requirements for
training expenses
0
2,754
0
2,754
2. Requirements for equipment: - Lower courts
868,870
868,870
3. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
393,765 144,385
393,765 144,385
9. Infrastructure Program Requirements:
- Renovation/Refurbishings - New Construction )
502,230 2,222,069
502,230 2,222,069
CY 2008 8nhancement Level 0 2,754 4,131,319 4,134,073
TABLE 29 Computation of CY 2008 Expenditure Estimates
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2008 Current Level 8,334,220 2,190,117 0 10,524,337
CY 2008 Enhancement Level
0
2,754 4,131,319 4,134,073
CY 2008 Expenditure Estimates
8,334,220 2,192,871 4,131,319 14,658,410
Percentage Share 56.86 14.96 28.18 100.00
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 26 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 30 Reconciliation of CY 2008 EXPENDITURE Estimates with CY 2008 Revenue Estimates
(in thousand PhP)
EXPENSE CLASS CY 2008 TARGET
BUDGET ALLOCATION
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIFFERENCE
Personal Expenses – 80% 13,247,024 8,334,220 4,912,804
Maintenance & Other Operating Expenses – 10% 1,655,878 2,192,871 (536,993)
Capital Outlays – 10% 1,655,878 4,131,319 (2,475,441)
TOTAL Budget – 100% 16,558,780 14,658,410 1,900,370
TABLE 31 Revised CY 2008 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1. Requirements for MOOE: - PHILJA requirements for training expenses
2,754
2,754
2. Requirements for equipment: - Lower courts
868,870
868,870
3. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
393,765
144,385
393,765
144,385
4. Infrastructure Program Requirements - Renovation and refurbishings - New Construction (HOJ)
502,230
2,222,069
502,230 2,222,069
5. Reserve for Contingencies 1,900,370 1,900,370
CY 2008 Enhancement Level, as revised 0 2,754 6,031,689 6,034,443
TABLE 32 Computation of Revised CY 2008 Expenditure Estimates (1st Iteration)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2008 Current Level 8,334,220 2,190,117 0 10,524,337
Revised CY 2008 Enhancement Level 0 2,754 6,031,689 6,034,443
CY 2008 Expenditure Estimates, as revised 8,334,220 2,192,871 6,031,689 16,558,780
Percentage Share 50.33 13.24 36.43 100.00
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 27 REVISED FINAL REPORT
3.4 CY 2009 3.4.1 The computation of CY 2009 expenditure estimates is presented in Tables 33 – 39.
TABLE 33 Computation of CY 2009 Minimum Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2008 total budget 8,334,220 2,192,871 6,031,689 16,558,780
Less: Non-recurring expenditures: - Terminal Leave - Pensions - PHILJA Training Exp - Capital Outlays Provisions
294,750 444,932
2,754
6,031,689
294,750 444,932
2,754 6,031,689
CY 2009 Minimum Level 7,594,538 2,190,117 0 9,784,655
TABLE 34 Computation of CY 2009 Current Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2009 Minimum Level 7,594,538 2,190,117 0 9,784,655
Add: Adjustments: Terminal Leave (10% increase) Pensions (10% inc.) Provision for inflation (5%)
324,225 489,425
109,506
324,225 489,425 109,506
CY 2009 Current Level 8,408,188 2,299,623 0 10,707,811
TABLE 35 Computation of CY 2009 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1. Requirements for MOOE: - PHILJA requirements for
training expenses
2,754
2,754
2. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
399,617 126,636
399,617 126,636
3. Infrastructure Program Requirements
- Renovation and refurbishings - New Construction (HOJ)
0 2,222,069
0 2,222,069
CY 2009 Enhancement Level 0 2,754 2,748,322 2,751,076
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 28 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 36 Computation of CY 2009 Expenditure Estimates
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2009 Current Level 8,408,188 2,299,623 0 10,707,811
CY 2009 Enhancement Level 0 2,754 2,748,322 2,751,076
CY 2009 Expenditure Estimates 8,408,188 2,302,377 2,748,322 13,458,887
Percentage Share 62.47 17.11 20.42 100.00
TABLE 37 Reconciliation of CY 2009 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2009 Revenue Estimates
(in thousand PhP)
EXPENSE CLASS CY 2009 TARGET BUDGET
ALLOCATION
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIFFERENCE
Personal Expenses – 75% 12,977,943 8,408,188 4,569,755
Maintenance & Other Operating Expenses – 15% 2,595,589 2,302,377 293,212
Capital Outlays – 10% 1,730,392 2,748,322 (1,017,930)
TOTAL Budget – 100% 17,303,924 13,458,887 3,845,037
TABLE 38 Revised CY 2009 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1. Requirements for MOOE: - PHILJA requirements for
training expenses
2,754
2,754
2. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
399,617 126,636
399,617 126,636
3. Infrastructure Program Requirements - Renovation and
refurbishings - New Construction (HOJ)
0 2,222,069
0 2,222,069
5. Reserve for Contingencies 3,845,037 3,845,037
CY 2009 Enhancement Level, as revised
0 2,754 6,593,359 6,596,113
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 29 REVISED FINAL REPORT
Table 39 Computation of Revised CY 2009 Expenditure Estimates (1st Iteration)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2009 Current Level 8,408,188 2,299,623 0 10,707,811
Revised CY 2009 Enhancement Level
0 2,754 6,593,359 6,596,113
CY 2009 Expenditure Estimates, as revised
8,408,188 2,302,377 6,593,359 17,303,924
Percentage Share 48.59 13.31 38.10 100.00
3.5 CY 2010 3.5.1 Tables 40 – 46 present the computation of CY 2010 expenditure estimates.
TABLE 40 Computation of CY 2010 Minimum Level Expenditure Requirements
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2009 total budget 8,408,188 2,302,377 6,593,359 17,303,924
Less: Non-recurring expenditures: - Terminal Leave - Pensions - PHILJA Trng Exp - Capital Outlays
324,225 489,425
2,754
6,593,359
324,225 489,425
2,754 6,593,359
CY 2010 Minimum Level 7,594,538 2,299,623 0 9,894,161
Table 41 Computation of CY 2010 Current Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2010 Minimum Level 7,594,538 2,299,623 0 9,894,161
Add: Adjustments: Terminal Leave (10%
increase) Pensions (10% inc.) Provision for inflation (5%)
356,648 538,368
114,981
356,648 538,368 114,981
CY 2010 Current Level 8,489,554 2,414,604 0 10,904,158
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 30 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 42
Computation of CY 2010 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements (in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1. Requirements for MOOE: - PHILJA requirements for
training expenses
3,980
3,980
2. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
406,070 68,628
406,070 68,628
3. Infrastructure Program Budget Requirements:
- Renovation/Refurb - New HOJ Const.
0 2,222,068
0 2,222,068
CY 2010 Enhancement Level 0 3,980 2,696,766 2,700,746
Table 43 Computation of CY 2010 Expenditure Estimates
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2010 Current Level 8,489,554 2,414,604 0 10,904,158
CY 2010 Enhancement Level 0 3,980 2,696,766 2,700,746
CY 2010 Expenditure Estimates
8,489,554 2,418,584 2,696,766 13,604,904
Percentage Share 62.40 17.78 19.82 100.00
TABLE 44 Reconciliation of CY 2010 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2010 Revenue Estimates
(in thousand PhP)
EXPENSE CLASS CY 2010 TARGET BUDGET
ALLOCATION
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES
DIFFERENCE
Personal Expenses – 75% 13,561,949 8,489,554 5,072,395
Maintenance & Other Operating Expenses – 15% 2,712,390 2,418,584 293,806
Capital Outlays – 10% 1,808,260 2,696,766 (888,506)
TOTAL Budget – 100% 18,082,599 13,604,904 4,477,695
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 31 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 45 Revised CY 2010 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1. Requirements for MOOE: - PHILJA requirements for
training expenses
3,980
3,980
2 Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
406,070 68,628
406,070 68,628
3. Infrastructure Program Budget Requirements:
- Renovation/Refurb - New Construction (HOJ)
0 2,222,068
0 2,222,068
4 Reserve for Contingencies 4,477,695 4,477,695
CY 2010 Enhancement Level, as revised
0 3,980 7,174,461 7,178,441
TABLE 46 Computation of Revised CY 2010 Expenditure Estimates (1st Iteration)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2010 Current Level 8,489,554 2,414,604 0 10,904,158
Revised CY 2010 Enhancement Level
0 3,980 7,174,461 7,178,441
CY 2010 Expenditure Estimates, as revised
8,489,554 2,418,584 7,174,461 18,082,599
Percentage Share 46.95 13.38 39.67 100.00
3.6 CY 2011 3.6.1 The computation of the expenditure requirements for CY 2011 are presented in
Tables 47 – 53. It is noted that the change in percentage sharing of the three expense classes during the six year period is very minimal considering that improvements in PS and MOOE were concentrated only in Years 1 and 2 and no additional increases in MOOE except for inflation , were provided in succeeding years. While the increase in capital outlays has also gradually decreased during the six-year period, the level of its expenditure requirements under the enhancement level, however, was sustained by increases in the amounts provided for the reserve for contingencies.
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 32 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 47 Computation of CY 2011 Minimum Level Expenditure Requirements
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2010 total budget 8,489,554 2,418,584 7,174,461 18,082,599
Less: Non-recurring expenditures: - Terminal Leave - Pensions - PHILJA Training Expenses - Capital Outlays
356,648 538,368
3,980
7,174,461
356,648 538,368
3,980
7,174,461
CY 2011 Minimum Level 7,594,538 2,414,604 0 10,009,142
TABLE 48 Computation of CY 2011 Current Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2011 Minimum Level 7,594,538 2,414,604 0 10,009,142
Add: Adjustments:
Terminal Leave (10% increase) Pensions (10% inc.) Provision for inflation (5%)
392,313 592,205
120,730
392,313 592,205 120,730
CY 2011 Current Level 8,579,056 2,535,334 0 11,114,390
TABLE 49 Computation of CY 2011 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1. Requirements for MOOE: - PHILJA requirements for
training expenses
2,967
2,967
2. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
410,677
57,536
410,677
57,536
3. Infrastructure Program Budget Requirements: - New Construction (HOJ)
2,222,068
2,222,068
CY 2011 Enhancement Level 0 2.967 2,690,281 2,693,248
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 33 REVISED FINAL REPORT
Table 50 Computation of CY 2011 Expenditure Estimates
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2011 Current Level 8,579,056 2,535,334 0 11,114,390
CY 2011 Enhancement Level 0 2.967 2,690,281 2,693,248
CY 2011 Expenditure Estimates 8,579,056 2,538,301 2,690,281 13,807,638
Percentage Share 62.13 18.38 19.49 100.00
TABLE 51 Reconciliation of CY 2011 Expenditure Estimates with CY 2011 Revenue Estimates
(in thousand PhP)
EXPENSE CLASS CY 2011 TARGET
BUDGET ALLOCATION
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES DIFFERENCE
Personal Expenses – 75% 14,172,239 8,579,056 5,593,183
Maintenance & Other Operating Expenses – 15% 2,834,448 2,538,301 296,147
Capital Outlays – 10% 1,889,632 2,690,281 (800,649)
TOTAL Budget – 100% 18,896,319 13,807,638 5,088,681
TABLE 52 Revised CY 2011 Enhancement Level Expenditure Requirements
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
1. Requirements for MOOE: - PHILJA requirements for
training expenses
2,967
2,967
2. Budgetary Requirements of APJR: - Locally-funded projects - GOP Peso-counterparts
410,.677 57,536
410,677 57,536
3. Infrastructure Program Budget Requirements: - New Construction (HOJ)
2,222,068
2,222,068
4. Reserve for Contingencies 5,088,681 5,088,681
CY 2011 Enhancement Level, as revised
0 2,967 7,778,962 7,781,929
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 34 REVISED FINAL REPORT
TABLE 53 Computation of Revised CY 2011 Expenditure Estimates (1st Iteration)
(in thousand PhP)
PARTICULARS PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2011 Current Level 8,579,056 2,535,334 0 11,114,390
Revised CY 2011 Enhancement Level
0 2,967 7,778,962 7,781,929
CY 2011 Expenditure Estimates, as revised
8,579,056 2,538,301 7,778,962 18,896,319
Percentage Share 45.40 13.43 41.17 100.00
3.6.2 The reconciliation process during the six-year period was guided by the principle of
conservatism, principally because improved revenue generation efforts are expected not to firmly take ground in the initial years of reform implementation. Moreover, the national government financial position is projected to stay flat with very minimal improvements, if any. Thus, the calculation of the expenditure requirements under the enhancement level during these years, while having gone into the process of translating reform proposals into annual budgetary requirements, has faithfully and continually provided annually for reserve for contingencies covering projected revenue estimates in excess of computed expenditure requirements to serve as buffer just in case the revenue estimate projections do not materialize.
3.6.3 It is noteworthy mentioning that despite this conservative stance, the implementation
of all the reform proposals is expected to have been completed at the end of the plan period in CY 2011.
3.6.4 Tables 54 present the CY 2006 – 2011 expenditure requirements of the Judiciary by
expense class and by annual percentage growth.. Significant percentage increases were registered only in years 1 and 2 and only for PS and MOOE in year 2 where capital outlays expenditure requirements registered a decrease following a year 1 monumental increase. The succeeding years registered consistently minimal increases for all three expense classes.
3.6.5 Table 55 presents the CY 2006 – 2011 expenditure requirements of the Judiciary
broken down into regular operations and enhancement level requirements. What is observable in this table is the consistent increase in regular operations from CY 2006 to 2011. The enhancement level expenditure requirements, however, displayed a somewhat erratic trend, with decreases in CY 2007 to CY 2009, and increasing in CYs 2010 and 2011.
3.6.6 The hypothetical illustrations presented here are not considered ideal nor even
satisfactory situations, and much is to be desired, particularly in the case of expense class allocations. Any improvements thereon will have to consider the actual revenue situation and the actual needs of the various offices and courts.
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
JUDICIARY MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN • CY 2006-2011 35 REVISED FINAL REPORT
ADB TA NO. 3693-PHI – STRENGTHENING THE INDEPENDENCE AND DEFINING THE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE JUDICIARY
Table 54 Proposed Judiciary Six – Year Expenditure Program, CY 2006 - 2011
(in thousand PhP)
AMOUNT ANNUAL GROWTH IN % YEAR
PS MOOE CO TOTAL PS MOOE CO TOTAL
CY 2005 6,904,796 1,000,332 100,078 8,005,206
CY 2006 7,277,313 1,545,935 6,340,121 15,163,369 5.40 54.54 6235.18 89.42
CY 2007 8,266,977 2,088,580 5,490,163 15,845,720 13.60 35.10 (13.41) 4.50
CY 2008 8,334,220 2,192,871 6,031,689 16,558,780 0.81 4.99 9.86 4.50
CY 2009 8,408,188 2,302,377 6,593,359 17,303,924 0.89 4.99 9.31 4.50
CY 2010 8,489,554 2,418,584 7,174,461 18,082,599 0.97 5.04 8.81 4.50
CY 2011 8,579,056 2,538,301 7,778,962 18,896,319 1.05 4.95 8.43 8.42
TABLE 55 Judiciary Expenditure Program for CYs 2006 – 2011
(in thousand PhP)
REGULAR OPERATIONS ENHANCEMENT OR
CAPACITY BUILDING P/P/AS
TOTAL
CY 2006 6,951,394 8,211,975 15,163,369
CY 2007 8,869,579 6,976,141 15,845,720
CY 2008 10,524,337 6,034,443 16,558,780
CY 2009 10,707,811 6,596,113 17,303,924
CY 2010 10,904,158 7,178,441 18,082,599
CY 2011 11,114,390 7,781,929 18,896,319
THE DESIGN TEAM
This design report is the product of the intensive discussions and team work, where individual contribution to the collective effort went far beyond one’s assigned area. Delineation of work blurred as the collective intelligence took over. The design team includes the following: CONSULTING TEAM International Consultants CARL BAAR, Ph.D. (in alphabetical order) RICHARD B. HOFFMAN SANDRA ELLEN OXNER Local Consultants VICKY A. ALINSUG (in alphabetical order) EMMANUEL L. BENITEZ NAZARIO S. CABUQUIT REYNALDO P. CHANG VIOLETA C. ESGUERRA BENJAMIN A.I. ESPIRITU, Ph.D. SALVADOR M. ENRIQUEZ, JR. MYRNA S. FELICIANO, Ph.D. CAROLYN O. MERCADO NARCISA O. SANTOS HECTOR D. SOLIMAN ORLANDO S. ZORILLA Contributing Consultants VIRGILIO A. DOMPOR VIRGINIA ROXAS VIENNA A. DIUCO ROSETTE C. LIBREA JEANETTE LUCIA CARIDAD A. ASENCIO GRETHEL T. LEDESMA Copy Editor REGINA A. SAMSON Project Team Leader SALVADOR M. ENRIQUEZ, JR Co Team Leader VICKY A. ALINSUG SUPPORT GROUP Technical and Administrative GRETHEL T. LEDESMA Support JEANETTE LUCIA CARIDAD A. ASENCIO JONATHAN O. CANILANG PAMELA ABALOS-CARRANZA
MARILYN S. MANAIT