SENATE HEARING Legal experts led by former Chief Justice Reynato Puno, head of the consultatitve committee that drafted the proposed federal Charter, and former Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr., air their views during a hearing called by the Senate committee on constitutional amendments on Tuesday. —EDWIN BACASMAS
Public disapproval of constitutional revision and federalism is no reason to stop moves to amend the 1987 Constitution, according to the spokesperson for the Consultative Committee that drafted a proposed federal charter for the Duterte administration.
Conrado Generoso told a Senate hearing on Tuesday that public sentiment about revising the Constitution and adopting federalism was bound to change in the coming days, as the country had just begun discussions on the proposal.
A Pulse Asia poll conducted from June 15 to June 21 found that 67 percent of Filipinos disapproved of the amendment of the 1987 Constitution, while 62 percent opposed the proposal for a shift to federalism.
Change in public pulse
“The consultative committee has just finished its draft, and the discussion, presentation, consultation and debate have just begun. So we would imagine it would only be in the coming weeks and months that the public pulse would change,” Generoso said at the Senate inquiry into proposals for the amendment of the Constitution.
“To suggest therefore that the proposals should be dropped entirely because there is not yet a majority supporting it might be wrong,” he said.
Candidates for political positions don’t drop out of the race just because they rank low in polls in the beginning, he added.
Minority lawmakers in the House of Representatives, however, expect more Filipinos to oppose constitutional revision and the introduction of federalism as the people realize that the proposal will only serve politicians’ vested interests.
Commenting on the Pulse Asia poll, Magdalo Rep. Gary Alejano said in a statement that the absence of public clamor and lack of knowledge about the proposal rendered the efforts for the amendment of the Constitution for a shift to federalism “inorganic.”
“Clearly, there is no public clamor. Worse, the people do not have the capacity and understanding, as of the moment, to engage in the process of Charter change. This attempt is premature,” Alejano said.
Vested interests
Makabayan bloc Reps. Antonio Tinio and France Castro said the Duterte administration should expect more Filipinos to oppose the proposal, as “vested interests” behind it continued to be exposed.
Rep. Ariel Casilao, also a member of the Makabayan bloc, called on Malacañang and its allies to take the cue from the Pulse Asia poll and abandon attempts to tinker with the Constitution.
Deputy Speaker Gwendolyn Garcia said on Monday that the House would give priority to the proposal after the resumption of sessions next Monday, fueling suspicion that President Duterte’s majority allies would declare a House-alone constituent assembly that would amend the Constitution.
The Senate has rejected a constituent assembly, unless the voting on proposed amendments to the Constitution would be separate.
On Tuesday, Sen. Panfilo Lacson described the talk of a House-alone constituent assembly in graphic terms on Twitter.
“This doltish notion of revising the Charter via Con-ass (constituent assembly), Con-con (constitutional convention), or even people’s initiative without the [Senate’s] participation in a bicameral system such as ours smells worse than week-old shit [in] an unflushed toilet of a congressman suffering from colon cancer,” Lacson said.
Lacson did not mention any names, but Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez earlier said the House could sit as a constituent assembly and propose changes to the Constitution even without the Senate.
But at Tuesday’s hearing at the Senate, the country’s top legal experts said the House alone could not propose revisions to the Constitution, and that the two chambers of Congress must vote separately on the proposals.
Former Senate President Aquilino Pimentel Jr. said both houses of Congress must introduce resolutions calling for a constituent assembly for the process to commence.
Separate voting is also needed because, otherwise, the House would just overwhelm the Senate.
Former Chief Justice Reynato Puno, head of the consultative committee that drafted a proposed federal Charter, agreed with Pimentel that the House alone could not amend the Constitution.
Retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Nachura said there should be separate voting.
Puno’s committee, on the President’s request, revised the transitory provisions of the draft federal charter to cut the terms of the President and Vice President Leni Robredo, bar them from seeking reelection in 2022, and authorize elections for the selection of a transitional president and transitional vice president.
But at Tuesday’s Senate hearing, University of the Philippines professor Gene Pilapil slammed the revision as a “reverse power grab” or “impeachment by a new constitution.”
Pilapil said the “stunt” was retrogressive, as it undermines the mandate of the 16 million Filipinos who voted for Mr. Duterte and the 14 million who voted for Robredo.
Marcos for president?
Former Chief Justice Hilario Davide also criticized the revision, which does not bar Mr. Duterte from running for transitional president.
Davide said he believed the President would choose former Sen. Ferdinand Marcos Jr. as his running mate and they would surely win.
Marcos would then be able to run for President in the federal government, Davide said. —With a report from Jerome Aning