Casiple: Proposed amendment to Constitution only ‘restricts’ political dynasties

MANILA, Philippines — The anti-political dynasty provision in the proposed amendments to the 1987 Constitution is merely a “restriction” and not a “ban.”

This was the clarification made by political analyst Ramon Casiple from the Institute for Political and Electoral Reform (IPER) as he presented Tuesday the proposed amendments to the 1987 Constitution being pushed by the Inter-Agency Task Force on Constitutional Reform (IATF).

“We would like to state first that the word in public, in the media is a ban. It’s not a ban, it’s a restriction. Meaning you have a certain leeway here,” Casiple said before members of the House committee on constitutional amendments.

“The reason here is in our own discussion, the right to run and to vote and be voted upon, is actually there. We have to recognize that. In principle, anybody who can vote can also run, of course, according to the requirements of the position,” he added.

However, Casiple said that this right is not an “absolute right.”

“That’s why you have qualifications in the first place,” Casiple said.

A document earlier provided by the IATF stated that a political dynasty exists when “a family whose members are related as a spouse, and up to the second degree of consanguinity or affinity, whether such relations are legitimate, illegitimate, half, or full-blood, maintains or is capable of maintaining a political control by succession or by simultaneously running for or holding elective positions.”

Thus, the inter-agency proposed that no person related to an incumbent elective official as a spouse, and within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity can run for the same position in the following election.

Further, IATF has proposed that persons related as a spouse, and within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity cannot run simultaneously and hold office for governor and vice governor, as well as mayor and vice mayor, respectively.

The 1987 Constitution states that the “State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”

However, no law has been passed to define what is a political dynasty.

“So what we did in the IATF is to define it, and second, set forth the minimum rules,” Casiple said.

During the meeting of the House committee on constitutional amendments last week, some lawmakers noted that the proposed provision is “anti-democratic,” noting that it is the right of the people to choose their leaders.

Edited by MUF