Like some of his colleagues, Senate President Tempore Ralph Recto will not take a risk on Charter change proposal.
Recto explained that even if the two chambers of Congress convene as a Constituent Assembly (Con-ass) and agree to vote separately, any member may still insist on joint voting and raise the issue before the Supreme Court.
“I am against total revision of the Constitution,” the senator said in a text message Wednesday.
“The risk is that we convene as a Constituent assembly then someone insists voting jointly even if there is an agreement of voting separately. The Supreme Court may decide to vote jointly.”
“I will not risk it as I am against a total revision of the Constitution shifting to a federal form of government which may include a parliamentary system,” Recto said.
The best option, he said, is to amend the Constitution slowly just like passing ordinary legislation with a three-fourths vote.
When passing a legislation, the Senate and the House of Representatives deliberate and vote separately on a measure, then meet in a bicameral conference committee to reconcile their versions.
Once passed in the bicameral committee, the measure will be sent back to both chambers for ratification before transmitting to the President for signature.
“Just like ordinary legislation, voting separately with 3/4 vote,” Recto said. “Let’s start with economic provisions. No need to change the form of government.”
Newly-installed Speaker Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo earlier said that the only way to move forward on the Charter change issue is for both chambers of Congress to agree to vote separately on any amendments to the Constitution.
“We should move forward and the way to move forward is to agree to vote separately,” Arroyo said.
Senators Panfilo Lacson and Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan were also skeptical of Arroyo’s statement.
READ; Arroyo: House to vote separately from Senate on Cha-cha
READ: Lacson, Pangilinan still skeptical of Charter change despite Arroyo proposal