ABAKADA GURO PARTYLIST vs. PURISIMA- Attrition Act of 2005, R.A. No.

9335
FACTS:
Petitioners question the Attrition Act of 2005 and contend that by establishing a system of rewards and incentives
when they exceed their revenue targets, the law (1) transforms the officials and employees of the BIR and BOC into
mercenaries and bounty hunters; (2) violates the constitutional guarantee of equal protection as it limits the scope of
the law to the BIR and BOC; (3) unduly delegates to the President the power to fix revenue targets without sufficient
standards; and (4) violates the doctrine of separation of powers by creating a Congressional Oversight Committee to
approve the laws implementing rules.
ISSUE:
Is R.A. No. 9335 constitutional?
HELD:
YES. R.A. No. 9335 is constitutional, except for Section 12 of the law which creates a Joint Congressional Oversight
Committee to review the laws IRR.
That RA No. 9335 will turn BIR and BOC employees and officials into bounty hunters and mercenaries is purely
speculative as the law establishes safeguards by imposing liabilities on officers and employees who are guilty of
negligence, abuses, malfeasance, etc. Neither is the equal protection clause violated since the law recognizes a valid
classification as only the BIR and BOC have the common distinct primary function of revenue generation. There are
sufficient policy and standards to guide the President in fixing revenue targets as the revenue targets are based on
the original estimated revenue collection expected of the BIR and the BOC.

However, the creation of a Joint Congressional Oversight Committee for the purpose of reviewing the IRR formulated
by agencies of the executive branch (DOF, DBM, NEDA, etc.) is unconstitutional since it violates the doctrine of
separation of powers since Congress arrogated judicial power upon itself.