Through Which The Nation Is Associated And Pays Tribute To The Municipality Of Cabrera, In The Department Of Santander, On The Occasion Of The Celebration Of The Two Hundred (200) Years Of Its Foundation And Other Provisions Dictate

Original Language Title: Por medio de la cual la Nación se asocia y rinde homenaje al Municipio de Cabrera, en el departamento de Santander, con motivo de la celebración de los doscientos (200) años de su Fundación y se dictan otras disposiciones

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$20 per month, or Get a Day Pass for only USD$4.99.
ACT 1358 2009
(November 12)
Official Gazette No. 47531 of November 12, 2009 CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC

By which the Nation is associated and pays tribute to the Municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its Foundation and other provisions.

THE CONGRESS OF COLOMBIA DECREES:
ARTICLE 1o. The Nation is associated with the commemoration and pays public tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation, met on 8 November 2008, and exalts the memory of its founders, José Luis Delgado, Rafael and Enrique Nunez, Juan Ramon and Bonifacio Afanador, Tadeo Navarro and Rafael Rojas, among others.
Article 2.
. Empower the National Government in compliance and in accordance with Articles 288, 334, 341 and 345 of the Constitution and the powers established by Law 715 of 2001, set in the General Budget of the Nation, and / or boost through the national co-financing system, budgetary allocations necessary to advance the following works of public or social interest and benefit to the community in the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander:
1. Completion of Construction Headquarters Integrated College Cabrera.
2. Paving the way San Gil Cabrera Barichara. Effective Jurisprudence


ARTICLE 3. Expenditure authorizations granted to the Government under this Act shall be incorporated in the Budget of the Nation, according to organic standards in budgetary matters, first, reallocating resources currently exist in each executing agency without implying an increased budget and secondly, according to the availabilities that occur in each fiscal year.

ARTICLE 4. This law applies from the date of its enactment.
The President of the honorable Senate.
JAVIER CACERES LEAL.
The Secretary General of the honorable Senate,
EMILIO OTERO DAJUD.
The President of the honorable House of Representatives
ALFONSO GOMEZ EDGAR ROMAN.
The Secretary General of the honorable House of Representatives,
JESUS ​​ALFONSO RODRÍGUEZ CAMARGO.
REPUBLIC OF NATIONAL COLOMBIAGOBIERNO.
Published and complied.
Given in Bogotá, DC, 12 November 2009.

Alvaro Uribe Minister of Interior and Justice, Fabio Valencia Cossio
.
The Technical Vice Minister of the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit, responsible for the functions of the Office of the Minister of Finance and Public Credit,
NATALIA SALAZAR FERRO.
Bogotá, DC, September 30, two thousand and nine (2009)
Office No. CS-338

Doctor JAVIER CACERES LEAL President


Senate City.
Reference: File OP-111. C-506/09. Judge Speaker Dr. Jorge Ivan Palacio Palace. revised standard: Bill number 21 210 2007 2007 Senate Chamber "through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the Department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200 ) years of its foundation and other provisions ". Dear Dr.
:
politely, and in accordance with Article 16 of Decree 2067 of 1991, I would send a copy of the Judgment C-506 of 2009 of twenty-nine (29) July two thousand and nine (2009) , issued in the process of the reference.
While I would send the original of the legislative record two hundred thirty eight (238) pages.
Yours sincerely, MARTHA
VICTORIA Sáchica MENDEZ, General Secretary
.
Annex Judgment with 30 pages and the legislative record with 238 pages. Judgment C-506
2009
Reference: OP-111 record
presidential objections raised to the 2nd article of Bill 21, 2007 Senate Chamber 210 2007, "Through which the Nation associates and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions ".
Judge Speaker: Dr. Jorge Ivan Palacio

Palace Bogotá, DC, twenty-nine (29) July two thousand and nine (2009).
The Plenary Chamber of the Constitutional Court, in exercise of its constitutional and legal powers, particularly those under Articles 167 and 241, paragraph 8 of the Constitution, the formalities and requirements of the Decree 2067 of 1991, utters the following: JUDGMENT
I
. BACKGROUND

By a communication received at the General Secretariat of the Corporation's eighteen (18) November two thousand and eight (2008), the President of the Senate did get the bill 021 42007 Senate Chamber 210/07 , "through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions", which article 2 it was challenged by the Government on grounds of unconstitutionality.
Done corresponding deal, the matter was referred to substantiation twenty (20) November two thousand and eight (2008). Twenty-seven (27) November following process knowledge gotten down and the Secretaries-General of the Senate and House of Representatives sending evidence from the legislative process followed for adoption of the report of presidential objections was requested.
Because they were not timely provided all the necessary measures to verify whether it complied with the procedure for the adoption of the report of objections evidence, the Court issued Auto 378 of December 3, 2008, by which abstained to decide on objections as constitutional and legal prerequisites for doing so are not met. In the same decision the Chamber supeditó the subsequent process the verification by the Substantiating Justice, they were provided the evidence for the processing of objections to the draft presidential reference.
After the formulated requirements were close friends to the file needed to continue the process of judicial review in the matter of the reference tests, why the Substantiating Justice decided to go ahead with the process.
II TEXT OF BILL objected
The Court then transcribes the final text adopted by Congress, the bill Senate 021 2007, 210 2007 Camera, "Through which the Nation associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions "it also underscores article 2, contested by the Government for reasons of unconstitutionality:
FINAL BILL tO 2007 CAMARA 210, 021, 2007 SENATE
through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, TEXT with the celebration of the 200th anniversary of its foundation and other provisions.

The Congress of Colombia DECREES: Article 1.
. The Nation is associated with the commemoration and pays public tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation, met on 8 November 2008, and exalts the memory of its founders, José Luis Delgado, Rafael and Enrique Nunez, Juan Ramon and Bonifacio Afanador, Tadeo Navarro and Rafael Rojas, among others. Article 2.
. Empower the National Government in compliance and in accordance with Articles 288, 334, 341, and 345 of the Constitution and the powers established by Law 715 of 2001, set in the General Budget of the Nation, and / or drives through the national co-financing system, budgetary allocations necessary to advance the following works of public or social interest and benefit to the community in the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander:
1. Completion of Construction Headquarters Integrated College Cabrera.
2. Paving the Way San Gil - Cabrera - Barichara.
Article 3o. Expenditure authorizations granted to the Government under this Act shall be incorporated in the General Budget of the Nation, according to organic standards in budgetary matters, first, reallocating resources currently exist in each executing agency without implying an increased budget and secondly, according to availability occurring in each fiscal year.
Article 4o. This law applies from the date of its enactment. "
LEGISLATIVE PROCESS PROJECT III objected
The legislative process of Bill 021, 2007 Senate Chamber 210 2007, through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the Santander department, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions ", presents the following relevant facts:
1. Initiative and pending in the Senate

- On 20 July 2007 the project was presented to the General Secretariat of the Senate, by Congressman Oscar J. Reyes Cardenas, filed with the number 021 of 2007, Senate. The project was published in the Gazette of the 345th Congress on Thursday, July 26, 2007, Senate pages 31 and 32.
- The paper first debate in Senate (Second Committee), presented by Senator Carlos Barriga Emiro Peñaranda it was published in the Congress Gazette number 429 on Thursday, September 6, 2007, Senate (pages 22 to 24).
- According to the substantiation report signed by the Secretary General of the Second Standing Constitutional Commission of the Senate [1], prior to the discussion and vote on the draft announcement was made at the meeting of September 11, 2007, for the next session (Act 04) [2] and the articles was approved unanimously [3] with a quorum of 12 senators in the next session, that is, the September 18, 2007, (Act 05) [4 ].
- The paper for the second debate in the Senate (Plenary) submitted by Congressman Carlos Emiro Barriga Penaranda, was published in the Congress Gazette number 589 on Thursday, November 22, 2007, Senate (pages 16-18).
- According to the substantiation report signed by the Secretary General of the Senate [5], prior to the discussion and vote on the draft announcement was made in Plenary Session of December 5, 2007, as stated in the record number 25, published in the Gazette No. 41 of 15 February 2008; the articles was adopted at the Plenary Session of December 10, 2007, as recorded in the minutes number 26, published in the Gazette No. 58 Tuesday 26 February 2008; the quorum was composed of 95 senators, none of which negatively vote the project.
2. Step in the House of Representatives
- I referred the bill to the House of Representatives, the President of the Chamber handed it to the Second Standing Constitutional Commission, which was filed with the number 210 2007, camera [6].
- The paper first debate in the House (Second Committee), presented by the Representative Silfredo Morales Altamar, was published in the Gazette of the 81st Congress on Thursday March 13 April 2008, Camera (pages 1-2) .
- According to the report substantiation signed by the General Secretary of the Second Standing Constitutional Commission of the House [7], prior to the discussion and vote on the draft announcement came at a meeting of April 1, 2008, for the next session, and the project was approved at the meeting of April 2, 2008 unanimously attended by 17 representatives, as stated in the Act No. 20 of 2008, published in the Gazette No. 396 Friday June 27 2008 [8].
- The paper for the second debate in the House (Plenary) submitted by the representative Silfredo Morales Altamar, was published in the Gazette number 332 Congress Monday June 9, 2008, Camera (pages 12 and 13).
- According to the substantiation report signed by the Secretary General of the Chamber [9] prior to the discussion and vote on the draft announcement was made in Plenary Session of June 11, 2008, for Tuesday's session June 17, 2008 (Act 117) [10] and the articles adopted at the plenary session on June 17, 2008 (Act 118) [11].
IV OBJECTIONS THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC
The Government [12] objected unconstitutional article 2 of the project and consequently returned to Congress without the corresponding presidential approval.
For the Executive, the 2nd article of the bill is unconstitutional since it neither in the explanatory memorandum of the project or the respective presentations of paperwork the fiscal impact of the initiative and potential sources of funding required analyzed for implementation.
Explained the Government: "The initiative did not make any of the resources required to finance the implementation of the planned works there projection. Nor said the alternative source of funds for purposes of financing. So, the bill is inconsistent, howsoever that such programs are not provided within the Medium Term Fiscal Framework. They are not included, the expedition pressed spending project without the necessary source to cover them.

The Ministry of Finance considered in due time the draft law consisting in the approval by the National Government and the respective territorial entity of resources for the financing of works raised therein, required the clear identification of the costs involved and or the respective sources of funding, in accordance with Article 819 of the Law on the 7th 2003. on that occasion, the ministry stated:
'as explained in the light of the 7th article of Law 819 of 2003, would need to be clearly established in the presentations of the project, the fiscal cost thereof as well as the source of additional revenue generated to finance such cost, as reiterated this entity on multiple occasions' .
So, since the papers the project did not include the analysis of the respective fiscal cost, nor indicated the additional source for funding, the implementation of the initiative is inconsistent with the Medium Term Fiscal Framework, which is why the National government allowed respectfully object to the initiative in question, as this supposed ignorance of the mandates provided for in Article 819 of the Law on the 7th of 2003 and therefore infringed Article 151 of the Constitution.
In accordance with the constitutional parameters of planning, regulatory hierarchy that holds the Law on the National Development Plan and the organic laws, especially Law 819 of 2003, respectfully requests accommodate these objections, in order to prevent the dismantling of the resources and their destination to isolated targets investment programs under him. "
V. Congress insisted IN PROJECT APPROVAL Objected Legislative cells integrated
Accidental Commission for the purpose of analyzing the arguments of the Executive, prepare a joint report and submit it to the consideration of each of the plenary. The text of the relevant report is as follows [13]:
"In order to give effect to Article 167 of the Constitution and Article 199 of Law 5 of 1992, in relation to the presidential objections to bills , very politely we would like to address you in order to reject the arguments of unconstitutionality that the National Government has argued for the number 210 Project 2007 Camera, 021, 2007 Senate, through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to Cabrera municipality in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions, according to the following considerations dictate.
The Minister of Finance and Public Credit, in filed on July 24 this year occupation, raises against the bill in question, which the article 2 is unconstitutional, 'every time that neither the preamble to the project, or the respective presentations of paperwork the fiscal impact of the initiative and potential sources of funding required for implementation analyzed '. Points out that 'The initiative did not make any of the resources required to finance the implementation of the planned works there projection. Nor said the alternative source of resources for purposes of such funding '. And he concludes stating that 'the implementation of the initiative is inconsistent with the Medium Term Fiscal Framework as this supposed ignorance of the mandates provided for in Article 819 of the Law on the 7th of 2003'.
The text of Article 2 of the bill before us is:
'Article 2o. Empower the National Government in compliance and in accordance with Articles 288, 334, 341 and 345 of the Constitution and the powers established by Law 715 of 2001, set in the General Budget of the Nation, and / or boost through the national co-financing system, budgetary allocations necessary to advance the following works of public or social interest and benefit to the community in the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander:
1. Completion of construction of the Headquarters Integrated College Cabrera.
2. Paving the way San Gil Cabrera-Barichara '.
As shown, article 2 of this project is calling on the Government to allocate and / or tending to push forward works of public or social interest, at no time is forcing the government to implement these headings budget items.

The jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court has been emphatic against the objections of unconstitutionality that the government argues for this kind of bills. In that sense, it establishes the Court, that if a law decreeing public spending enshrines an imperative mandate addressed to the Executive, it is unconstitutional, but instead is a law that is limited to decree public spending and as such is only a sufficient legal title for the eventual inclusion of the relevant item in the budget law, the same result consistent with the higher mandates, this analysis that has as its foundation the grammatical structure used by the legislature.
The prosecutor General's Office in June 3841 Concept 2005, addressed to the Constitutional Court, within the constitutional process that ended with the Judgment C-729 of 2005, conceptualized:
'Thus, we can conclude in accordance with the Constitution and the approach of the constitutional Court that the laws by which Congress enacts public spending, in accordance with the constitutional always order and when they are limited to enable the Government to include these costs in the draft budget. On the contrary, they are unconstitutional, if by such laws is to force the government to implement a given expenditure '.
It is understood that this bill is simply creating a legal title as a basis for that at a later stage the government, if it deems appropriate, incorporated into the General Budget of the Nation the necessary items to meet attentions previously enacted by Congress without prejudice to the article on the 7th of Law 819 of 2003, because although inconsistencies consider the national government, from the economic point of view, will be raised at the same time to do or not expenditures in budget. In the latter sense, the Constitutional Court has ruled, in Judgment C-502 of 2007, which 'admit that the article on the 7th of Law 819 of 2003 is a requirement process, which creates an additional burden and exclusive on Congress, the formation of the bills, means, in practice, considerably curtailing the power of Congress to legislate and grant the Ministry of Finance a kind of veto power over bills ', and in turn establishes that' accept that conditions set out in Article the 7th of Law 819 of 2003 are a requirement pending incumbent comply solely to Congress disproportionately reduce the power of legislative initiative lies in the Congress, which the principle is violated separation of the branches of the Public Power, to the extent that seriously injured the autonomy of the legislature '.
Moreover, Article 102 of Law 715 of 2001 provides:
'in the General Budget of the Nation shall not include appropriations for the same purposes referred to in this law to be transferred to entities territorial, other than the shares regulated in it, without prejudice to the budgetary appropriations for the execution of duties by the Nation participation of local authorities, the principle of competition and headings of financing for development programs functions exclusive competence of local authorities'. (Emphasis original).
From the above it follows that the items which Article 2 of the responding project, where it is invoked this Act 715 of 2001, may be included in the national budget in order to meet the requirement referred to in cofinancing in the execution of the works listed, which means being consecrating the option to the Nation of conduct authorized through the system concurrency works, as an exception to the budget constraint of the Nation assumes obligations they It corresponds to local authorities with the resources transfers.
In that order, not the content of the 7th article of the Law 819 of 2003 is unknown, provided, as is evident in the bill in question, the national government authorization is not an imperative for immediate compliance but this so far comply with the budgetary possibilities, compliance with which may be made by co-funding mechanism, also not a vice of unconstitutionality generating this kind of provision in the said project.
The Constitutional Court against the latter, he expressed in Judgment C-1113, 2004, the following:

'To make it clear and in case of future concepts of the Ministry of Finance that may impede the normal processing of the project is not being authorized to enter into any kind of agreements or contracts nor adopting any co-financing these situations yes would give rise to constitutional arguments. In this case the authorizations given to the national government fall within the exceptions provided for in Article 102 of Law 715 of 2001 (Coordination, subsidiarity and competition), ie those covered by the co-financing system do not violate the Constitution.
The draft stated without giving rise to another interpretation, which is the national government who will drive and define the instruments for the adaptation, restoration, protection and conservation; this mean, first, that the municipality and the department will also contribute resources available to meet these projects; and second it will be the National Government who adopt discretionary funding mechanism. Underline outside the original text.
Therefore, the authorization indicating article 2 of this project can not be understood as a peremptory order, but to clearly infer that this is only a spending authorization for the government to include the corresponding items, directly and / or through co-financing mechanism.
In addition, the legal interpretation that the government can not be so drastic that ignores the goals he has set, as the National Development Plan (Law 1151 of 2007), Article 129, states: 'Projects by Make viable. The National Government will accompany the local authorities in the design and structuring of projects in the Annex, even if they are not included in this National Investment Plan, are important to help achieve greater competitiveness, productivity and social impact of the regions and to further advance the goals of the internal agenda and Vision Colombia Segundo Centenario, for subsequent inclusion in the National Bank of Investment Projects, BPIN. Some of these projects will be funded credit of $ 1,000 million referred to this law. "
It is therefore to be requested from the Constitutional Court to declare the constitutionality of the bill in question, since the authorization of the National Government for building works there consigned infrastructure does not constitute a mandate mandatory, requiring compliance with the requirements of Article 819 of the law on the 7th 2003. Conclusion
:
should be noted that article 2 of the aforementioned bill authorizes the Government to concur in a public works, being this call or invitation, which can not be understood as an imposition.
With the above considerations, we ask the Plenary of the Senate and House of Representatives, reject and declare unfounded the objections on grounds of unconstitutionality presented by the President of the Republic the bill number 2007 210 House, 021 2007 Senate, through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions, and therefore refer the case of this project to the honorable Constitutional Court, so that within six (6) days, as expressed in paragraph 1 of Article 199 of Law 5 of 1992, decide on its constitutionality. "
VI. CITIZENS INTERVENCION
In order to ensure public participation, the process was set in list for those wishing to intervene clarifications which might present their findings to the Corporation. The expected term expired in silence.
VII. CONCEPT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE NATION
Mr. Attorney General's Office, through concept of 25 November 2008, considers that the presidential objections to the 2nd article of the draft are unfounded and therefore requests the Court to declare the constitutionality of it.

Start the Chief Public Prosecutor reiterating that the Constitution of 1991 establishes the general rule for Congress, the free legislative initiative in budget matters and in particular with regard to the initiative spending. He adds that this parliamentary competition develops the principle of legality of public expenditure, under which up to Congress, in its capacity as organ of popular representation, order the necessary expenditures to implement the commitments inherent in the rule of law. However, continues the Attorney General, the constituent by way of exception, reserved for the executive legislative initiative regarding some aspects of this.
Explains the Attorney General's Office that the laws that create public spending are simply legal titles as a basis for that at a later stage the government, if it deems appropriate, incorporated into the General Budget of the Nation necessary items to meet the obligations previously enacted by Congress.
Adds Attorney Vista: "The laws authorizing public spending per se do not have the legal ability to directly modify the appropriations bill or the National Development Plan, nor can peremptorily order the Government to make the necessary budget transfers under to which it is to obtain resources to cover the costs that your application demands.
(...)
This means that in terms of public spending, the Constitution made a division of powers between Congress and the national government, so that both have initiative of expenditure in accordance with the constitutional provisions, and must act in coordination within its competence. Thus, the government requires the approval of their projects by Congress and Congress requires the consent of the Government, who will determine the incorporation of expenditure declared by Congress, provided they are consistent with the National Development Plan and General budget of the Nation, as stipulated in Article 346 of the Charter.
(...)
Consequently, the Executive is the body constitutionally empowered to make the spending budget, referring to the urgent social needs, the existence of funding and resources for programs and projects contained in the Plan Law national Development, without Congress has jurisdiction to impose the inclusion of items to ensure the execution of expenditures enacted by a previous law, which does not mean that the legislature lacks initiative on public spending.
So, we can conclude, in accordance with the Constitution and the proposals of the Constitutional Court that the laws by which Congress enacts public spending always conform to constitutional order and when they are limited to enable the Government to include these costs in the proposed budget. On the contrary, they are unconstitutional, if by such laws is to force the government to implement a given expenditure.
(...)
Thus, the concept of Public Prosecutions, the grammatical structure used by the legislator in the text of Article 2 of the project objected, saying: 'Empower the National Government pursuant to Article 102 Law 715 of 2001, included in the General Budget of the Nation, budgetary allocations to attend ... 'is not those that could be understood as a peremptory order, but to clearly infer that this is only an authorization of expenditure for the government to include the corresponding items. For this aspect, the Office finds that the disputed project conforms to the Constitution. "
As for the article 7 of Law 819 of 2003, the Public Prosecutor concludes that this provision is a tool for streamlining legislative activity, so that this is done with knowledge of the fiscal costs generated by each of the laws approved by the Congress, allowing also issued laws are in harmony with the economic situation and economic policy laid down by the relevant authorities. However, for the Fiscal Vista, this standard does not represent a burden on the Congress in the formation of the bills.

Therefore, says the Attorney General's Office, "the importance that emerges from the content of the article on the 7th of Law 819 of 2003 not known, however, when it is clear, as in the present case the authorization to the National Government is not an imperative of immediate compliance, but a power that must be complied with to the extent of budgetary possibilities and under the mechanism of co-financing, the requirements listed in that article, are erected in a vice generate the unconstitutionality of the provision defendant (sic.) "
VIII. CONSIDERATIONS AND FUNDAMENTALS
1. Competition
In accordance with Articles 167 and 241, paragraph 8 of the Constitution, the Court has jurisdiction to decide definitively on the constitutionality of the rules challenged by the Government, for which Congress insist approval.
2.
Analysis methodology Before advancing the substantive examination of the objections is necessary to determine whether the budget for that purpose are met. Accordingly, the Court will begin by analyzing what these requirements and if they meet in the present case, specifically with regard to the opportunity in its formulation and the insistence of Congress.
3. Procedural requirements for the substantive examination of the objections of unconstitutionality made by the Government
For the Court to address the substantive examination of the objections of unconstitutionality is first necessary to examine two issues: (i) whether the Government had formulated them in a timely manner and (ii) if Congress rejected them and insisted on approving the project.
3.1. The first requirement is provided for in Article 166 of the Constitution, in accordance with Article 198 of Law 5 of 1992 -Regulation of Congress. According to these rules, the national government has six (6) days to return with objections any bill that does not consist of more than twenty articles, ten (10) days when the project is twenty-one to fifty articles, and twenty (20) days when the items are more than fifty; failure to do so in that time the President is obliged to sanction and promulgate the applicable law [14].
Article 166 of the Constitution also provides that if the time of filing objections Congress is in recess, the President shall publish them within that period. This requires taking into account the provisions of Article 138 of the Constitution, according to which Congress, in its own right, will meet in regular session for two periods per year that constitute a single legislature: the first session starts July 20 and ends on December 16, and the second begins March 16 and ends on 20 June following [15].
3.2. The second requirement for the Court to address the substantive study of the objections is the insistence of Congress in approving the project. In this regard, Article 167 of the Charter provides that all objected project will legislative chambers to second debate and warns that when the government takes objection of unconstitutionality, "if the cameras insist," the matter shall be referred to the Court for decide on its constitutionality.
The case law has explained that the insistence of the legislative chambers, which in any case must have a minimum load of argument [16], constitutes "the starting point for you to this rule on the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of the project objected" [17]. Moreover it has considered that requirement as "true budget constitutional procedural control" [18]. He also noted that to insist on the approval of a project can not exceed the Chambers within two legislatures, the first being that "it is pursuing at the time when the respective project is returned" [19].
In short, when not one of the above noted procedural requirements (timely submission by the Government and Congress insistence on time), the Court should refrain from issuing a decision on the merits regarding the insistence made [20] is fulfilled .
4. Government objections and opportunity in its formulation
4.1. In the case under review the text of Bill 021, 2007 Senate Chamber 210/07, "through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, in connection with the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions ", consists of four (4) items.

Therefore, the term to return with objections was six (6) working days from the day following the receipt thereof by the Government National day.
As with tests that are in the file, the project was received by the President of the Republic on sixteen (16) of July 2008 [21], then the term for objections expired on day twenty-three (23)
July 2008. 4.2. The Court notes that the requirements laid down in Article 166 of the Constitution were duly addressed. Indeed, objections to the 2nd article of the draft were sent on July 23, 2008 [22], that is, within a period of six (6) days required by the policy (Rule 166) Letter.
Unobscured first question to address substantive analysis remains to be established whether Congress actually rejected the Government's objections and insisted on approving the project.
5. Step objections in Congress
5.1.
Objections Report Received presidential objections in Congress, the boards of the Senate and House Accidental Commission appointed to study them, that after analyzing the arguments of the Executive submitted its report to the consideration of each of the plenary .
5.1.1.
Senate of the Republic - Presentation of the Report. Congressmen Alferez Alvaro Tapias (Member of Congress) and Carlos E. Barriga Penaranda (Senator), presented on 26 August 2008 "Report on the presidential objections to the bill number 2007 210 2007 -021 Senate Chamber" . Its text is as follows [23]:
"PRESIDENTIAL REPORT OF OBJECTION TO BILL 210 CHAMBER 2007, 2007 SENATE
021 through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the 200th anniversary of its foundation and other provisions
Bogotá, DC, Aug. 26, 2008. Doctors are taught


SERRANO HERNAN ANDRADE President | || Senate of the Republic

GERMAN VARON Cotrino President

Honorable House of Representatives Bogotá, DC
Reference: Rejection of the presidential objections to the bill number 2007 210 House, 2007 021 Senate. Respected Presidents
:
In order to give effect to Article 167 of the Constitution and Article 199 of Law 5 of 1992, in relation to the presidential objections to bills, very politely allow us to target you in order to reject the arguments of unconstitutionality that the National Government has argued for the number 210 Project 2007 Camera, 021, 2007 Senate, through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, department
the Minister of Finance and Public Credit, in office filed 24 July: Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions, according to the following considerations dictate this year, raises against the bill in question, which the article 2 is unconstitutional, 'every time that neither the preamble to the project, or the respective presentations of paperwork the fiscal impact of the initiative was analyzed and possible sources of funding required for implementation '. Points out that 'The initiative did not make any of the resources required to finance the implementation of the planned works there projection. Nor said the alternative source of resources for purposes of such funding '. And he concludes stating that 'the implementation of the initiative is inconsistent with the Medium Term Fiscal Framework' as this implies ignorance of the mandates provided for in Article 819 of the Law on the 7th of 2003 '.
The text of Article 2 of the bill before us is:
Article 2o. Empower the National Government in compliance and in accordance with Articles 288, 334, 341 and 345 of the Constitution and the powers established by Law 715 of 2001, set in the General Budget of the Nation, and / or boost through the national co-financing system, budgetary allocations necessary to advance the following works of public or social interest and benefit to the community in the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander:
1. Completion of construction of the Headquarters Integrated College Cabrera.
2. Paving the way San Gil Cabrera-Barichara.
As shown, article 2 of this project is calling on the Government to allocate and / or tending to push forward works of public or social interest, at no time is forcing the government to implement these headings budget items.

The jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court has been emphatic against the objections of unconstitutionality that the government argues for this kind of bills. In that sense, it establishes the Court, that if a law decreeing public spending enshrines an imperative mandate addressed to the Executive, it is unconstitutional, but instead is a law that is limited to decree public spending and as such is only a sufficient legal title for the eventual inclusion of the relevant item in the budget law, the same result consistent with the higher mandates, this analysis that has as its foundation the grammatical structure used by the legislature.
The prosecutor General's Office in June 3841 Concept 2005, addressed to the Constitutional Court, within the constitutional process that ended with the Judgment C-729 of 2005, conceptualized:
'Thus, we can conclude in accordance with the Constitution and the approach of the constitutional Court that the laws by which Congress enacts public spending, in accordance with the constitutional always order and when they are limited to enable the Government to include these costs in the draft budget. On the contrary, they are unconstitutional, if by such laws is to force the government to implement a given expenditure '.
It is understood that this bill is simply creating a legal title as a basis for that at a later stage the government, if it deems appropriate, incorporated into the General Budget of the Nation the necessary items to meet attentions previously enacted by Congress without prejudice to the article on the 7th of Law 819 of 2003, because although inconsistencies consider the national government, from the economic point of view, will be raised at the same time to do or not expenditures in budget. In the latter sense, the Constitutional Court has ruled, in Judgment C-502 of 2007, which 'admit that the article on the 7th of Law 819 of 2003 is a requirement process, which creates an additional burden and exclusive on Congress in the training of bills, means, in practice, considerably curtailing the power of Congress to legislate and grant the Ministry of Finance a kind of veto power over bills ', and in turn establishes that' accept conditions set out in Article the 7th of Law 819 of 2003 are a requirement pending incumbent comply solely to Congress disproportionately reduce the power of legislative initiative lies in the Congress, which the principle of separation is breached of Public Power Branches, to the extent that seriously injured the autonomy of the legislature '.
Moreover, Article 102 of Law 715 of 2001 provides:
'in the General Budget of the Nation shall not include appropriations for the same purposes referred to in this law to be transferred to entities territorial, other than the shares regulated in it, without prejudice to the budgetary appropriations for the execution of duties by the Nation participation of local authorities, the principle of competition and headings of financing for development programs functions exclusive competence of local authorities. (Emphasis original).
From the above it follows that the items which Article 2 of the responding project, where it is invoked this Act 715 of 2001, may be included in the national budget in order to meet the requirement referred to in cofinancing in the execution of the works listed, which means being consecrating the option to the Nation of conduct authorized through the system concurrency works, as an exception to the budget constraint of the Nation assumes obligations they It corresponds to local authorities with the resources transfers.
In that order, not the content of the 7th article of the Law 819 of 2003 is unknown, provided, as is evident in the bill in question, the national government authorization is not an imperative for immediate compliance but this so far comply with the budgetary possibilities, compliance with which may be made by co-funding mechanism, also not a vice of unconstitutionality generating this kind of provision in the said project.
The Constitutional Court against the latter, he expressed in Judgment C-1113, 2004, the following:

'To make it clear and in case of future concepts of the Ministry of Finance that may impede the normal processing of the project is not being authorized to enter into any kind of agreements or contracts nor adopting any co-financing these situations yes would give rise to constitutional arguments. In this case the authorizations given to the national government fall within the exceptions provided for in Article 102 of Law 715 of 2001 (Coordination, subsidiarity and competition), ie those covered by the co-financing system do not violate the Constitution.
The draft stated without giving rise to another interpretation, which is the national government who will drive and define the instruments for the adaptation, restoration, protection and conservation; this mean, first, that the municipality and the department will also contribute resources available to meet these projects; and second it will be the National Government who adopt discretionary funding mechanism. Underline outside the original text.
Therefore, the authorization indicating article 2 of this project can not be understood as a peremptory order, but to clearly infer that this is only a spending authorization for the government to include the corresponding items, directly and / or through co-financing mechanism.
In addition, the legal interpretation that the government can not be so drastic that ignores the goals he has set, as the National Development Plan (Law 1151 of 2007), Article 129, states: 'Projects by Make viable. The National Government will accompany the local authorities in the design and structuring of projects in the Annex, even if they are not included in this National Investment Plan, are important to help achieve greater competitiveness, productivity and social impact of the regions and to further advance the goals of the internal agenda and Vision Colombia Segundo Centenario, for subsequent inclusion in the National Bank of Investment Projects, BPIN. Some of these projects will be funded credit of $ 1,000 million referred to this law. "
It is therefore to be requested from the Constitutional Court to declare the constitutionality of the bill in question, since the authorization of the National Government for building works there consigned infrastructure does not constitute a mandate mandatory, requiring compliance with the requirements of Article 819 of the law on the 7th 2003. Conclusion
:
should be noted that article 2 of the aforementioned bill authorizes the Government to concur in a public works, being this call or invitation, which can not be understood as an imposition.
With the above considerations, we ask the Plenary of the Senate and House of Representatives, reject and declare unfounded the objections on grounds of unconstitutionality presented by the President of the Republic the bill number 2007 210 House, 021 2007 Senate, through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions, and therefore refer the case of this project to the honorable Constitutional Court, so that within six (6) days, as expressed in paragraph 1 of Article 199 of Law 5 of 1992, decide on its constitutionality. "
- Publication. The report rejecting the presidential objections was published in the Gazette number 552 Congress Wednesday August 27, 2008, Senate (page 11) [24].
- Advance notice. The pre-announcement for the vote on the report of objections was held on Tuesday, October 21, 2008, as recorded in the minutes number 19 of that date, published in the Gazette No. 28 of February 6, 2009, (page 30 ). It reads:
"On instructions of the President and in accordance with Legislative Act number 01 of 2003, the Secretariat announced the projects to be discussed and adopted at the next session. Yes Mr. President
projects to discuss and vote at the next plenary session of the Senate are: Projects

report objections Bill Senate number 021 210 2007 House, by through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the 200th anniversary of its foundation and other provisions. "

- The unanimous adoption of the 96 Senators present took place on Tuesday, October 28, 2008, as recorded in the minutes of this date number 20, published in the Gazette No. 29 of February 6, 2009 (pages 4 22-24) [25]. Senate President instructed the Secretariat to continue the report objections to the bill reference, the President granted the use of the word Senator Carlos Barriga Emiro Peñaranda, who was heard on the background of the report.
Subsequently, the Chair opened the discussion of the report in which they are declared "... unfounded the objections raised by the Executive and closed discussion, imparts the Senate unanimously approved." (Page 23 of the Gazette number 29 of 2009).
5.1.2.
The House of Representatives before the vote on the report of objections bill reference announcement took place at the Plenary of the House of Representatives on October 8, 2008, as recorded in the record number 139 that date, published in the Gazette No. 798 Friday, November 14, 2008. on page 34 we read:
"on instructions from the President, with the consent of the Secretary General, in accordance with Legislative act 01 2003 and indicated by the Constitutional Court, the following projects for the plenary session on October 14, 2008 or for the next plenary session in which bills or legislative acts are discussed advertised.
(...)
Bill 2007 House number 210, 021, 2007 Senate, through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, in connection with the celebration of the 200th anniversary of its foundation and other provisions. Published in the Congress Gazette number 557 of 2008 ".
The vote and adoption of the report of objection was made at the meeting of October 14, 2008, as stated in the Act 140, published in the Congress Gazette 866 of November 26, 2008 (page 28) [26] , which highlights the following:
"Report Objections to bill 210 of 2007 House, Senate 021 2007, through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, department Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the 200th anniversary of its foundation and other provisions.
The report is as follows: Conclusion: It should be noted the second article of the aforementioned bill, which authorizes the government to concur in a public works, and this call invitation, which can not be understood as an imposition.
For the above reasons, we ask the Plenary of the Senate and House, reject and declare objections to the bill on grounds of unconstitutionality, presented by the President of the Republic unfounded. Therefore refer the case to the honorable Constitutional Court, so that in the six-day term set and decide on its constitutionality. Signature: Alvaro Alferez Carlos Barriga Peñaranda.
Read the President report.
Address the session by the Chair, Dr. Germán Male Cotrino:
is submitted to the Plenary objections the report read by the Secretary, discussion, advertisement to be closed, opens Closed What is Plenary approves?
Secretary General, Dr. Jesus Antonio Rodriguez C .:
Approved president. "
- Quorum deliberative and decision-making in Plenary. The deliberative and decision-making quorum for approval of the project was 151 of the 166 members that make up the Plenary of the Corporation, as stated in the Act number 140, published in the Congress Gazette 866 of November 26, 2008 (pages 1- 2) [27]. Voting took place under Article 129 of the Rules of Congress.
- Finally, the President of Congress sent the 18 November 2008 to the Constitutional Court the draft reference for the Corporation decide on the constitutionality of the challenged article.
6. For the Court, the processing of the bill 210 of 2007 House, 021 2007 Senate, through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the 200 years of its foundation and other provisions, it complies with Article 167 of the Constitution, because to study the presidential objections Accidental Committee composed of members of both legislative cells, which gave a report named which it was approved by the plenary of the Senate and House.

Also, in compliance with the provisions of Article 79-4 of Law 5 of 1992 Internal -Regulation of Congress, this report was included in the agenda of the plenary session of the legislative chambers and underwent to vote differently session that was previously announced, as provided in the second paragraph of Article 160 of the Constitution, introduced by article 8 of Legislative Act No. 1 of 2003.
Verified processing the bill, background will examine the objections raised by the executive.
7. Delimitation of the subject matter of analysis
7.1. According to case law [28], the consideration by the Court of the provisions challenged by the President of the Republic, at the insistence of Congress, for violating the Constitution, is restricted to the rules at the charges made by the objector and the arguments used by Congress to justify his insistence, aspects that are limiting the scope constitutional res judicata.
In the present case objections of unconstitutionality proposed by the Government does not refer to the entire bill, but one of its provisions, why the consideration of the Court is limited to text objected, taking into account the objections raised by the executive and the arguments by Congress to insist on the adoption of the bill.
7.2. The Court considers that the objections of the Executive pose the following legal problem: The Constitutional Court must determine whether during the processing of the bill reference, the Congress ignored the requirements of Article the 7th of Law 819 of 2003 and, therefore, he violated the provisions of Article 151 above, taking into account the organic nature of the Act.
8. The 2nd article of the Bill 021 of 2007 Senate 210 2007 House, by means of which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200 ) years of its foundation and other provisions not know the provisions of Article 151 of the Constitution. 8.1
Both the report submitted to the plenary of the Senate and House of Representatives, as the concept of the Attorney General's Office, are consistent in that the arguments presented by the President of the Republic have led to several decisions of the Constitutional Court, which both documents refer to the jurisprudence of this Court to resolve the legal problem that concerns the Chamber.
From the Judgment C-502 of 2007, the Court indicated the scope of the 7th article of Law 819 of 2003. Based on the arguments in that decision, the Court has declared unfounded presidential objections based on the alleged breach of the provisions of that standard, as was the case, among others, the following orders:
- C-015-a, 2009, for the OP-114 process, in which the presidential objections to the project analyzed Act 72 of 2006 Senate 231 2007 House, "by which the nation is linked to the celebration of thirty (30) years of legal existence of the University of La Guajira and orders in his Homage building some work" .
- C-1200, 2008, corresponding to OP-109 process, in which the presidential objections to the bill number 2007 086 Senate were analyzed, 158 of 2006 House, "through which the nation is associated the celebration of 304 years of foundation of the municipality of Valle de San Juan in the Department of Tolima and other provisions ".
- C-1197, 2008, corresponding to OP-108 process, in which the presidential objections to the 2nd article of the bill number 2007 062 Senate and 155 House 2006 were analyzed, "through which It declared as cultural heritage of the Nation's International Poetry Festival of Medellín and other provisions ".
- C-1139, 2008, corresponding to OP-104 process, in which the presidential objections to Bill No. 168 of 2006 Senate Chamber
085 2006, were analyzed "by which the Nation associated with the celebration of thirty years of academic activities of the University of La Guajira and other provisions ".
- 2008 C-731, OP-101 for the process in which the presidential objections to the bill 167th 2006 Senate were analyzed, 076 of 2006 House, "through which the nation is associated the celebration of 100 years of the town of Alexandria in the department of Antioquia ".

- 2008 C-315, OP-098 for the process in which the presidential objections to the bill number 2006 18 Senate and 207 House 2007 were analyzed, "for which rebates are set penalties remiss for compulsory military service. "
- 2009 C-441, OP-122 for the process, in which the Government's objections analyzed the Draft Law 217 of 2007 númrero Senate Chamber 098 2007, "through which commemorated the 30 years carnival Atlantic departmental and interdepartmental 10-year reign, declared cultural heritage and other provisions. "
Given that the legal issue raised in the case sub examine has been resolved by the Constitutional Court on several occasions, the Chamber has reiterated its jurisprudence limited to apply to this case.
9. The Court explained that the Congress and the national government have initiative on public spending, as Congress is entitled to submit projects involving public spending, but that the inclusion of budget items in the budget expenses is solely for the national government. Similarly, the Court has explained that the legislature may authorize the Government to carry out works in territorial entities, provided in the respective standards is established that the disbursement proceeds by co-financing system. On this matter, in Judgment C-113 of 2004, was recorded:
"(...) the Constitutional Court has established i) that there is no constitutional objection against the rules limited to 'authorize' the Government to include an expense, but by no means calling on him to do so. In these cases, said the Corporation that the Organic Budget Law is not violated, while the Government retains the power to decide whether or not to include among its priorities, and according to budget availability, authorized by the provisions expenses questioned ; ii) the authorizations granted by the legislature to the national government, to finance works in the local authorities, are compatible with the mandates of organic nature on distribution of powers and resources contained in Law 715 of 2001 that are part of the except as provided in Article 102 of the Act, namely when it comes to the 'budgetary appropriations for implementation by the Nation participation of local authorities, the principle of competition, and headings of co-financing program development functions exclusive competence of local authorities' ".
10. Article on the 7th of Law 819 of 2003 [29] provides that the bills that enact public spending should be provided the fiscal cost of the initiative, as well as the source of income to finance the cost. Moreover, the same rule provides that the fiscal impact of the project must be consistent with the Medium Term Fiscal Framework. Ruling C-502 of 2007, referred to this matter explaining:
"36. Based on the foregoing, the Court considers that the first three paragraphs of article on the 7th of Law 819 of 2003 should be understood as parameters of rationality of legislative activity, and as a burden that initially rests with the Ministry of Finance, once the Congress has reviewed, with information and tools at its disposal, the tax implications of a particular bill. This means that they are tools for improving legislative work.

That is, that article must be interpreted as meaning that its purpose is to obtain that laws be enacted taking into account the macroeconomic realities, but without creating insurmountable barriers to the exercise of the legislative function or create a power of legislative veto head of the Finance Minister. And in that process of legislative rationality the main burden rests with the Ministry of Finance, which is the one that has the data, official teams and expertise in economic matters. Therefore, in the event that the Congress dealing with a project incorporating erroneous estimates of the fiscal impact, on how to address these new expenditures or the compatibility of the project with the Attorney medium-term framework, it is up to the Minister of Finance intervene in the legislative process to illustrate to Congress on the economic consequences of the project. And Congress is to receive and evaluate the opinion issued by the Ministry. However, the burden of proof and convince lawmakers about the incompatibility of certain project with the Medium Term Fiscal Framework lies with the Ministry of Finance.
Moreover, we must reiterate that if the Ministry of Finance does not participate during the project during its formation in the Congress, it can hardly mean that the legislative process is flawed by not taking into account the conditions set out in Article 819 of the Law on the 7th of 2003. Since the main burden in the presentation of the tax consequences of the project lies with the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry omission to inform lawmakers about the problems It presents the project does not affect the validity of the legislative process and vitiates the applicable law ".
10.1 Subsequently, the Constitutional Court, by judgment C-315 of 2008, said:
"From the preceding transcript can be synthesized the following rules regarding the content and scope of the forecast of the fiscal impact within the bills:
the obligations under the 7th article of the law 819/03 constitute a parameter of legislative rationality, which aims to meet constitutionally valuable purposes, including the order of public finances, macroeconomic stability and effective enforcement. The latter as a preliminary study of the compatibility between the content of the bill and projections of economic policy, reduces the margin of uncertainty regarding the physical implementation of legislative provisions.
The mandate of adequacy between justification of bills and planning of economic policy, however, can not be understood as a procedural requirement for the adoption of legislative initiatives which compliance should lie solely in Congress. This in both (i) Congress lacks the technical assessment bodies to determine the fiscal impact of each project, identifying additional sources of funding and support for the medium-term fiscal framework; and ii) accept an interpretation of this nature would be an unreasonable burden for the Legislator and a correlative grant veto power to the Executive, through the Ministry of Finance, regarding the competence of Congress to make laws. A power of this character, which involves a barrier in the constitutional role of normative production, shown incompatible with the balance between the public authorities and the democratic principle.
If this mandate is considered as a mechanism of legislative rationality, compliance initially corresponds to the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit, once Congress has valued using the tools at its disposal, compatibility between the expenses generated the legislative initiative and projections of economic policy laid down by the Government. Thus, if the government considers that the cameras have conducted a fiscal impact analysis wrong, it corresponds to MOFTEC duty to attend the legislative procedure, in order to illustrate to Congress on the economic consequences of the project.
Article on the 7th of Law 819/03 can not be interpreted in such a way that the lack of concurrence of the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit in the legislative process, affecting the constitutional validity of the respective procedure. "

11. Article 2 of the draft challenged law authorizes the Government to allocate in the General Budget of the Nation, and / or drive through the national co-financing system, budgetary allocations necessary to carry out certain works of public or social interest and profit for the community in the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander; ie, the text of the challenged article conforms to the power granted to Congress to pass bills that entail public spending, since it does not impose the Government for its implementation, since it is limited to I empower him to include the corresponding items in the general budget of the Nation, allowing the National Government decides autonomously if you include the item in the budget and, if so, determine the amount of the corresponding item.
12. Look at the room in the legislative process, from the preamble, were taken into account the elements that would normally result in the presidential objections to the "laws of honor". Thus, in the report of the first debate, I published in the Gazette No. 429 Thursday 6 September 2007, pages 22, 23 and 24, was inscribed:
"3. Legal basis
accordance with the provisions of paragraph 11 of Article 150 of the Political Constitution, the Congress, by issuing a law, 'establish national income and expenses of the administration'. Similarly, Article 345 in its first paragraph, indicating that you can not make disbursement under the treasury who is not included in the expenditure budget and its second paragraph provides that there can be no public expenditure that has not been declared by Congress, by the departmental assemblies or by the District or Municipal Councils.
Also, the second paragraph of Article 346 confirms this, when he says that 'in the appropriations bill can not that does not correspond to a judicially recognized credit included departure, or spending enacted under the previous law. "
According to the above, it enshrines what is called the 'principle of legality of public expenditure', which has the scope to impose such expenditure is previously decreed by law and included in the General Budget of the Nation.
In this regard, the Constitutional Court Judgment C-685 of 1996 provided:
'The principle of legality of spending is one of the most important foundations of constitutional democracies. According to this principle for the Congress, as a body of plural representation, order and authorize expenditure, as this is considered a necessary mechanism controlling the executive and an inevitable expression of the democratic principle and the republican form of government (CP Article 1o). In the Colombian constitutionalism, legality of spending operates in two different moments, because in general expenditures should not only be previously decreed by law (CP Article 346) but also must be appropriated by the budget law (CP Article 345) to be actually made '. (Emphasis added).
It is appropriate to make clear that under the principle of legality of spending, Congress has the power to authorize public expenditure, as in this case the bill Through which the Nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions. He
During the study conducted by the Constitutional Court Sentence C-343 of 1995 on legislative initiative that determines public spending, stated:
'... The parliamentary initiative to introduce bills that enact public spending, does not involve the modification or addition of the General Budget of the Nation. Simply these laws serve title to the initiative of the Government, they are included later in the annual budget law the necessary items to meet those expenses. Some members of Congress itself could introduce the bill under examination and therefore also could order the allocation of items for repair and maintenance of the temple of San Roque in the city of Barranquilla.

Of course, in light of the above, both the Constitution and the law require the implementation of expenditure declared in this project depends on its inclusion in the General Budget of the Nation, for which must necessarily be counted on the initiative or with the authorization of the National Government, including the Minister of Finance and Public Credit. This Court declares formal constitutionality of the bill, as the initiative was not necessary or government guarantee for the same legislative process'.
Consequently, we submit for consideration of the honorable Senate this initiative as it complies with the constitutional framework governing the matter. "
13. The Ministry of Finance and Public Credit intervened in the legislative process through the office UJ-0702-08 of June 16, 2007 [30], addressed to the President of the House of Representatives. In this document reads:
"The bill we pay public tribute seeks occupies the municipality of Cabrera, Santander Department, due to the two hundred years after its foundation, and exalt the memory of its founders. Based on the above it authorizes the National Government to include items in the Annual Budget Law for works and programs intended to benefit the municipality. Finally, it provides that such items will not involve an increase in the budget, but to be financed by redeploying existing resources.
Regard, it should be noted that the Congress of the Republic approved the National Development Plan State Community Development for All ', which involves running multiple investments of national interest that require substantial financial resources for its implementation. That is why the reference project is not consistent with the fiscal outlook that the nation has set for the next four years, then press the expenditure without the appropriate funding source.
Therefore to the demands of spending that are planned in the National Development Plan is a priority by Congress to analyze the relevance of passing laws, commonly called 'honors', that create higher pressures public spending.
Moreover, this Ministry to recall that in accordance with the provisions of the 7th Article of Law 819 of 2003, organic character with the presentation of each bill must accompany the exhibition of the fiscal impact would imply its implementation and it should be noted, moreover, the new source of funding proposed for such implementation:
'Article 7.. Analysis of the fiscal impact of standards. At all times, the fiscal impact of any bill, ordinance or agreement, to order spending or giving tax benefits must be explicit and must be consistent with the Medium Term Fiscal Framework.
For these purposes, you must explicitly included in the preamble and in the papers respective processing fiscal costs of the initiative and the source of additional revenue generated to finance the cost.
The Ministry of Finance and Public Credit, at any time during the respective procedure in the Congress, must submit their concept against the consistency of the provisions of the preceding paragraph. In any case this concept may go counter to the Medium Term Fiscal Framework. This report will be published in the Gazette of Congress.
The bills of government initiative to raise an additional expense or a reduction of income, must contain the corresponding source replacement by decreasing spending or revenue increases, which must be analyzed and approved by the Ministry of Finance and Public credit.
In local authorities, the procedure provided for in the preceding paragraph will be stocked to the respective Ministry of Finance or the person acting '. (You underline added).
The bill does not expose the fiscal impact of the initiative and does not indicate a new source of funding in the explanatory memorandum. On the contrary, he orders a new priority in the allocation of expenditure. So, whatever that organic laws determine the legislative activity, the initiative in question suffers from unconstitutionality. "

As noted, the Government, through the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit, warned Congress of the Republic on the absence of studies related to the fiscal impact of the bill, noting that it was not consistent with the perspectives set for the next four years, as spending pressed without the appropriate funding source. In addition, the ministry said that the bill lacked the exhibition on the fiscal impact would involve implementation.
That is, in this case, even if the bill does not impose an expense but merely to propose to the Government the inclusion of particular heading in the General Budget of the Nation, the Executive disregarded the duty to cooperate with the Congress, in the sense of offering congressmen technical elements required to determine the fiscal impact of the project, without this means a defect that affects the legislative process, as established by the Corporation in Judgment C-502 2007, because in it was recorded: "since the main burden in the presentation of the tax consequences of the project lies with the Ministry of Finance, the failure of the Ministry to inform lawmakers about the problems that the project will not it affects the validity of the legislative process and vitiates the applicable law ".
14. The Chamber considers that article 2 of Senate Bill 021/07, 210 2007 Camera, "Through which the Nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions ", it merely authorizes the national government to allocate in the General Budget of the Nation and / or drives through the system of co-financing, budgetary allocations to advance the works there mentioned, which, as explained by the Constitutional Court, does not imply an imposition on the national government, but the legislator authorizes the Executive to include the corresponding items in the General Budget of the Nation.
That is, the Government will decide autonomously whether it includes heading in the budget and, if so, establish the amount of the respective game.
Therefore, the Court declared the presidential objection unfounded and declare the constitutionality in relation to the arguments put forward by the Executive.
IX. DECISION
In light of the foregoing, the Plenary Chamber of the Constitutional Court, on behalf of the people and by mandate of the Constitution, Resolves
:
First. Declared unfounded the objection of unconstitutionality made by the President of the Republic regarding the 2nd article of Bill 021, 2007 Senate Chamber 210/07, "Through which the Nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in Santander department, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions "
Second.- DECLARE EXEQUIBLE article 2 of the bill Senate 021 2007, 210 2007 Camera , through which the nation is associated and pays tribute to the municipality of Cabrera, in the department of Santander, on the occasion of the celebration of the two hundred (200) years of its foundation and other provisions solely on the charge raised in the presidential objection analyzed in this judgment.
Three.- DESE compliance with the provisions of Article 167 of the Constitution.
Notified, communicated, published and placed in the Gazette of the Constitutional Court.
Nilson Pinilla Pinilla, President; Maria Victoria Street Correa, Mauricio Gonzalez Cuervo, Juan Carlos Henao Pérez, absent with permission. Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo, Jorge Ivan Palacio Palacio, Jorge Ignacio Pretelt Chaljub, Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto, Luis Ernesto Vargas Silva, Judges; Victoria Sáchica Martha Mendez, General Secretary. * * *

1 Page 1 of Commission II test booklet Senate.
2 Act 04 of 11 September 2007, published in the Gazette 598 of November 26, 2007, p. 15 et seq
3 Gazette No. 598 of 2007, page 65. 4 Minutes 05
September 18, 2007, published in the Gazette 598 of November 26, 2007, p. 61 et seq
5 tests notebook Senate of the Republic, page 1. 6
test notebook, House of Representatives, pages 1 and following.
7 Notebook Test Chamber Commission II, pages 1 and 2.
8 Act No. 20 of April 2, 2008, published in the Gazette 396 of 27 June 2008. 9 Notebook test
Camera of Representatives, pages 1 and 2. 10 Minutes 117th
Wednesday June 11, 2008, published in the Gazette No. 422, p 45.

11 Act No. 118 Tuesday June 17, 2008, published in the Gazette No. 423, p. 23.
12 Main Booklet, pages 16 and 17.
13 Main Notebook, pages 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15.
14 On this point the Court has explained that the terms set forth therein refer a skillful and full days, which starts counting from the day following that on which the project was received for the sanction of rigor. Cfr., Constitutional Court, Judgments C-268 of 1995, C-380, 1995, C-292, 1996, C-510, 1996, C-028, 1997, C-063, 2002 and C-068 of 2004, C -433 2004 2006 C-856, C-1040, 2007, C-315 and C-616 2008 2008, among many others.
15 The standard clarifies that Congress will also meet in extraordinary sessions convened by the Government and during the time that this point, in which case it may only engage in the issues that the government submitted to it, subject to the function of political control of its own, which may be exercised at all times.
16 Constitutional Court, Judgments C-559 and C-2002, 1146, 2003, among others.
17 Constitutional Court, Judgment C-883 2007. See also Case C-616 and 731
2008. 18 Idem. See also Case C-1183
2008. 19 Cf., Constitutional Court, Judgments C-069, 2004, 2004 C-433, C-985 and C-482 2006 2008. 20 Court
constitutional, Judgments C-036, 1998, 2004 C-070, C-500, 2005, C-883 and C-2007, 1183, 2008, among others.
21 Main notebook, page 18.
22 main notebook, pages 16 and 17.
23 main notebook, pages 5, 6, 7 and 8.
24 test notebook Senate of the Republic.
25 test notebook House.
26 test notebook House.
27 test notebook House.
28 Judgments C-176, C-482, C-913, C-914, 2002; 1043 C-2000; 1997 C-256, among others.
29Esta Law was published in the Official Gazette number 45243 of July 9, 2003. The above text states:
"Law 819 of 2003
Whereby organic standards are issued in budgeting, accountability and fiscal transparency and other provisions.
(...) Article 7.
. Fiscal Impact Analysis of the Rules. At all times, the fiscal impact of any bill, ordinance or agreement, to order spending or giving tax benefits must be explicit and must be consistent with the Medium Term Fiscal Framework.
For these purposes, you must explicitly included in the preamble and in the papers respective processing fiscal costs of the initiative and the source of additional revenue generated to finance the cost.
The Ministry of Finance and Public Credit, at any time during the respective procedure in the Congress, must submit their concept against the consistency of the provisions of the preceding paragraph. In any case this concept may go counter to the Medium Term Fiscal Framework. This report will be published in the Gazette of Congress.
The bills of government initiative to raise an additional expense or a reduction of income, must contain the corresponding source replacement by decreasing spending or revenue increases, which must be analyzed and approved by the Ministry of Finance and Public credit.
In local authorities, the procedure provided for in the preceding paragraph will be stocked to the respective Ministry of Finance or his substitute. "
30 main notebook, pages 25 and 26.

Related Laws