CHIEF Justice Miguel S. Demapan says Gov. Juan N. Babauta’s proposed budget cuts affecting the judiciary are unlawful and an intrusion into the affairs of the judicial branch of government.
Demapan said a reduced budget would jeopardize the judiciary’s ability to serve the public, adding that Babauta’s attempt to make the budgetary changes without the Legislature’s authorization “is an illegal encroachment on that branch’s exclusive domain.”
“Your action is not only unlawful but also represents an intrusion into the affairs of the third branch,” Demapan told the governor in letter prepared on Thursday, a copy of which was obtained by Variety.
Press Secretary Cecile T. Celes yesterday said she would consult the governor before issuing a statement on Demapan’s letter.
The chief justice said he and Babauta met twice and on each occasion he requested the governor to reconsider the actions taken by the Planning and Budget Office regarding the judiciary’s reduced quarterly allotments.
“In both instances you promised that you would look into our concerns and hopefully resolve them. On March 21, 2002, I wrote to you requesting that the judiciary budget be exempted from the reduction. Numerous follow-up calls to your office have gone unanswered,” Demapan said.
Demapan said he was surprised when he saw a copy of the Supreme Court’s third quarter allotment and noticed that it had been reduced by $64,252 or 8.4 percent.
He said Directive 215 and the March 21 memorandum issued by the Office of the Governor seemed to be limited to reducing the budget of the executive branch, with no mention of the judiciary’s budget.
Demapan cited a statute that removed the executive branch’s authority to reduce appropriated funds without legislative action.
“Monies appropriated by the Legislature for the use of the judiciary are reposed in trust in your office and as such, any withholding of our budgeted funds without the judiciary’s consent is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine,” the chief justice said.
The judiciary’s efforts to fulfill its duties “are already stymied by an inadequate budget and to put the (judiciary) in the position of being unable to serve the public through an illegal mandate is unacceptable,” Demapan said.
The judiciary “understands the financial situation the CNMI is facing and although it is reluctant to have its budget reduced beyond what is already an insufficient amount, we would agree to a reduction of 6.5 percent, (our proportional share of the total projected reduction),” he said.
Reducing its budget by more than 6.5 percent, however, would significantly hamper the judiciary’s ability “to serve the public and would do a great disservice to the CNMI,” Demapan said.
