Does the Commission on Human Rights enjoy fiscal autonomy?

The Commission on Human Rights, unlike the three Constitutional Commissions, does not enjoy fiscal autonomy. (CHR Employees Association vs. CHR, G.R. No. 155336, November 24, 2004)

May revenue shortfall justify non-compliance with the constitutional mandate to automatically and regularly release approved appropriations of agencies vested with fiscal autonomy?

Revenue shortfall does not justify non-compliance with the mandate of Article IX (A), Section 5 of the Constitution to automatically and regularly release approved appropriations. The Constitution grants the enjoyment of fiscal autonomy only to the Judiciary, the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman. To hold that petitioner may be subjected to withholding or reduction of funds in the event of a revenue shortfall would, to that extent, place petitioner and the other entities vested with fiscal autonomy on equal footing with all others which are not granted the same autonomy, thereby reducing to naught the distinction established by the Constitution. (Civil Service Commission vs. DBM, G.R. No. 158791, July 22, 2005)

When there is a revenue shortfall, what agencies should be given priority in the release of their approved appropriations?

The agencies which the Constitution has vested with fiscal autonomy should be given priority in the release of their approved appropriations over all other agencies not similarly vested when there is a revenue shortfall. (Civil Service Commission vs. DBM, G.R. No. 158791, July 22, 2005)

May the "no report, no release" policy may be validly enforced against offices vested with fiscal autonomy?

The no report, no release policy may not be validly enforced against offices vested with fiscal autonomy without violating Article IX (A), Section 5 of the Constitution which provides:

Sec. 5. The Commission shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Their approved appropriations shall be automatically and regularly released.

The automatic release of approved annual appropriations to a constitutional commission vested with fiscal autonomy should thus be construed to mean that no condition to fund releases to it may be imposed. (Civil Service Commission vs. DBM, G.R. No. 158791, July 22, 2005)

Is Congress prohibited from reducing the appropriations of Constitutional Commissions below the amount appropriated for them for the previous year? How about the Judiciary?

With respect to the Judiciary, Art. VIII, Section 3 of the Constitution explicitly provides:

Section 3. The Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Appropriations for the Judiciary may not be reduced by the legislature below the amount appropriated for the previous year and, after approval, shall be automatically and regularly released.

On the other hand, in the parallel provision granting fiscal autonomy to Constitutional Commissions, a similar proscription against the reduction of appropriations below the amount for the previous year is clearly absent. Article IX (A), Section 5 merely states:

Section 5. The Commission shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Their approved annual appropriations shall be automatically and regularly released.

The plain implication of the omission of the provision proscribing such reduction of appropriations below that for the previous year is that Congress is not prohibited from reducing the appropriations of Constitutional Commissions below the amount appropriated for them for the previous year. (Civil Service Commission vs. DBM, G.R. No. 158791, July 22, 2005)