A Legal and Constitutional Commentary on Catanduanes’ QRF Crisis**
The brewing controversy over the Quick Response Fund (QRF) in Catanduanes is no longer a mere policy disagreement — it has evolved into a dangerous political squabble disguised as “checks and balances.” What we are witnessing is a distortion of constitutional principles: checks and balances meant to protect the people are now being weaponized to prolong their suffering.
Under Article II, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution, the government’s foremost duty is to serve and protect the people. Yet in Catanduanes, the mechanisms created to fulfill that duty are now being used to delay it. Checks and balances exist to prevent abuse, not to obstruct relief operations in the middle of a calamity.
The Sangguniang Panlalawigan (SP), led by Vice Governor Robert Fernandez, indeed holds the legislative power to review and ensure that provincial actions comply with the law under the Local Government Code (RA 7160). Meanwhile, the Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (PDRRMC), under Governor Patrick Alain Azanza, is legally mandated under RA 10121 (DRRM Act) to act swiftly, decisively, and efficiently during calamities — swiftly, not after a month-long political tug-of-war.
So the question now is this: Are we witnessing legitimate oversight or a political wrestling match disguised as governance? Because if the battle is no longer grounded on legality but on egos, alliances, and control, then this is no longer governance — this is leadership paralysis, and the public is the ultimate victim.
The deadlock between the SP’s counterproposal and the PDRRMC’s original plan has pushed the province into an administrative coma. RA 10121 is explicit: the QRF is intended to be a standby fund for immediate relief and recovery. Immediate, as in not one month. Immediate, as in not after vetoes, committee revisions, and political narratives. Meanwhile, residents of the 11 affected towns remain homeless, some still under torn roofing and makeshift shelters — while their leaders debate what should have been resolved in one sitting.
Former Congressman and Vice Governor Cesar Sarmiento was correct: with an urgent certification from the executive, the SP should have passed the measure within the day, just as Congress does under the Constitution when the President certifies a bill as urgent under Article VI, Section 26(2).
In Catanduanes, however, “quick response” has mutated into “weak response” — or in Bicolano, “wikwik”: too late to matter.
The situation worsens with the glaring failure of coordination. According to DILG Provincial Director Uldarico Razal, the SP’s counterproposal deviates from the 5% Calamity Fund structure mandated under Section 21 of RA 10121 and Section 324(d) of the Local Government Code, which allocates 30% of that fund specifically as the QRF. This should have been prevented if the SP’s official representative regularly attended PDRRMC meetings, as required to ensure legislative alignment.
Now the province faces vetoes, possible overrides under Section 55 of the Local Government Code, and the real possibility that even if the SP overrides, the executive may still refuse implementation due to legal inconsistencies.
And who suffers? Not the board members. Not the governor. But the people who have no roof, no food, and no time left to wait.
If politics has taken precedence over people’s welfare, then this may constitute dereliction of duty and neglect of official functions under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019) and Article XI (Accountability of Public Officers) of the Constitution. Prolonging relief due to political strategy is not just immoral — it may be administratively and criminally actionable.
Why insist on a counterproposal when the law clearly instructs the SP to review whether the PDRRMC proposal is legal or ultra vires — NOT to rewrite it for political leverage? Why stretch the process for weeks when thousands of families are trying to rebuild their lives?
If there is bad faith, someone must be held liable — whether through administrative complaints, Ombudsman actions, or electoral judgment in 2028. As former Congressman Sarmiento noted, if history repeats itself, the people will incriminate those responsible, because the public does not forget leaders who abandoned them in times of need.
In fairness, two PBMs refused to join the questionable counterproposal. Their stance reflects the correct legal action: adopt the already-budgeted response fund since it forms part of the annual budget previously enacted by law. Their courage proves that conscience still breathes within local governance.
But the rest must confront a harsher truth: Is this truly about legal oversight, or political positioning? Because in calamities, when the roofs have collapsed and the food has spoiled, the people do not need politicians — they need leaders.
It is time — long overdue — for both the SP and the executive to sit down, shed their pride, return to the law, and resolve this crisis.
Catandunganons deserve a government that acts, not argues; that responds, not delays; that protects, not politicizes.
Enough of the wikwik response.
The people need real leadership — now, not next session, not next month, and definitely not after the next election.
