Move to void peace pact premature, lawmakers agree
Cagayan de Oro Rep. Rufus Rodriguez (left) and Senate President Franklin Drilon: Premature INQUIRER FILE PHOTOS
Lawmakers have brushed off as insignificant the move by the Philippine Constitution Association (Philconsa) asking the Supreme Court to void the peace agreement between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).
Cagayan de Oro Rep. Rufus Rodriguez said the case filed by Philconsa to declare as unconstitutional the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro (CAB), including the Framework Agreement on the Bangsamoro (FAB), was “premature” and had “no cause of action.”
Senate President Franklin Drilon also called the Philconsa petition “patently premature,” saying it should not be the basis for delaying the debates on the Bangsamoro Basic Law (BBL) in Congress.
“Until the BBL is passed, the existing ARMM (Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao) charter will govern. The petition cannot be a basis to postpone the debates on the BBL,” Drilon said in a text message.
Drilon said the petitions were premature because the government could not implement agreements that needed legislation.
He said the senators would review the BBL in plenary once the committee report is submitted, in accordance with their schedule.
Rodriguez said the FAB explicitly requires the creation of a transition commission to transform the preliminary agreements into law.
“I believe the Supreme Court will dismiss this. It will not grant them a TRO or injunction because the rights are not yet violated as the agreements have yet to be implemented,” he said.
Rodriguez said Philconsa should have waited until Congress had finished its work on the BBL before it filed a case in the Supreme Court.
No pressure
“That’s the only time they can say there are things that are unconstitutional. So there is no pressure or effect on the Senate or the House. We are going to continue in the House by August,” said Rodriguez.
The lawmaker also questioned why Philconsa waited this long to file a case in the high court when the FAB was approved in October 2012 and the CAB in March 2014.
“Why do you think they did not file at that time? They did not file because it was really premature. This time, it is still premature. That is why I don’t know how Philconsa, which is very knowledgeable about this, can file this case,” said Rodriguez, noting Philconsa’s participation in the House hearings.
Life blood
Philconsa president and Leyte Rep. Ferdinand Martin Romualdez said the group’s petition would provide the “life blood” to the controversial peace agreement which has been hamstrung by questions on its constitutional infirmities and backlash from the deaths of Special Action Force commander in Mamasapano, Maguindanao, at the hands of Muslim rebels.
“We should allow the Supreme Court to decide on the constitutionality of the peace agreement. The high tribunal is the final arbiter of all legal conflicts that divide the nation. I believe the Supreme Court will rule in the best interest of the country,” said Romualdez.
Congress is currently on recess. It failed to pass the BBL on June 11, the deadline set by the chamber leadership.
Unlike the House, the Senate has yet to come up with a committee report on the BBL.
Sen. Ferdinand Marcos, the head of the Senate local government committee tackling the measure, is scheduled to submit his substitute bill on the proposed measure when Congress returns on July 27.–With reports from Leila Salaverria and Christine Avendaño
RELATED STORIES
Philconsa leads petitions to SC vs BBL: It’s repugnant
MILF questions timing of Philconsa suit
RELATED VIDEOS
