MANILA, Philippines—Deputy Minority Leader Satur Ocampo said on Saturday the Supreme Court would be closely watched should the majority in the House of Representatives succeed in their plan to bring to the tribunal the question of whether Congress as a constituent assembly should vote jointly or separately in proposing changes to the Constitution.

It would not only be the Constitution that would be tested but the magistrates as well, said Ocampo, who has accused Malacañang of plotting to amend the Constitution to extend the President’s term.

A joint voting scheme is expected to render the Senate a minority since the chamber would only have 23 votes that correspond to the number of senators compared to the House’s 238.

“It is expected it will be a big test for the Supreme Court,” Ocampo said.

Ocampo said a Supreme Court decision on Charter change (Cha-cha) would have political implications, and that a decision could reflect badly on the tribunal.

“The Supreme Court might rule that both houses should vote jointly, and the people would see this as being favorable to the President,” he said.

The Supreme Court will get seven new members next year to replace justices set to retire. When this happens, all of the magistrates, save for Chief Justice Reynato Puno, would have been appointees of President Macapagal-Arroyo, who by law selects the justices.

Former Speaker Jose De Venecia earlier expressed concern that if President Arroyo chose people loyal to her, this could be linked to moves to amend the Charter.

But Majority Floor Leader Arthur Defensor said yesterday there was no reason for anyone to panic over the moves of the House to amend the Constitution.

Defensor said he saw no need to withdraw the resolutions in the House that seek to amend the Constitution’s economic provisions and the convening of Congress into a constituent assembly voting jointly to propose changes.

What lawmakers were concerned about was how the Constitution should be amended, not what should be changed, hence the people should not be wary of the representatives’ motives, Defensor said.

“There is no reason to panic, to be emotional about the whole thing,” he told the Inquirer in a phone interview. “I don’t understand why they have to have a rally.”

A rally is scheduled to be held today by civil society groups to protest moves to amend the Charter that they claim is a prelude to prolonging the President’s stay in Malacañang. The mass actions began Friday with a noise barrage in Makati.

Defensor stressed the House majority did not intend to extend the President’s term or that of any incumbent official, or to propose a parliamentary system of government so that Ms Arroyo could serve as prime minister.

He said the two “nonpolitical” Charter change resolutions—one authored by Speaker Prospero Nograles and the other by Camarines Sur Rep. Luis Villafuerte—were only intended to have the Supreme Court interpret provisions in the Constitution on how to amend the Charter.

The Nograles resolution seeks to change the Charter’s economic provisions to allow foreigners to wholly own businesses. The Villafuerte resolution seeks the convening of a constituent assembly that will vote jointly in changing the Charter.

Meanwhile, Malacañang officials yesterday shrugged off Friday night’s protest rally.

“To whom were they addressing it?” Undersecretary Anthony Golez said, referring to the protesters’ brief against term extension.

He pointed out that Malacañang had consistently declared it would not support any constitutional amendment lifting the President’s term.

Malacañang officials said the President supported lifting restrictive economic provisions of the 1987 Charter, but not the term limits of public officials, including that of the President.

But they said they were giving lawmakers a free hand on whether they would schedule amendments to the Constitution before or after Ms Arroyo ends her term in 2010.