House solons on economic Cha-cha: Let’s listen to foreign investors

MANILA, Philippines — Some members of the House of Representatives on Thursday emphasized the need to hear foreign investors and compare the Philippines’ situation to other nations when considering amending certain economic provisions of the 1987 Constitution.

This was in response to Supreme Court (SC) Associate Justice Antonio Carpio who pointed out that several measures have already been passed to allow foreign ownership of the business in the country — all without amending the Constitution.

READ: Carpio cites PH laws on foreign ownership of businesses

Bataan 1st District Rep. Geraldine Roman countered Carpio’s sentiments, stating that the lack of foreign investors proves otherwise.

“Between theory and practical, practically you know, and real talk ika nga sinasabi natin, pakinggan natin ‘yung mga investors (in real talk, as we say, let’s listen to the investors), and I think it doesn’t take much to be observant and compare our situation and that of other countries,” Roman said in a press conference on Wednesday.

“Sabi nga nila (As they say), we have a Constitution that is so specific, and unfortunately, it’s too specific when it comes to the economic provision. When, in general, you go around the world, and (the) Constitution is just a declaration of principles filled with motherhood statements, your ultimate objectives and it gives leeway and space for Congress to legislate the laws,” she added.

House Assistant Majority Leader and Ako Bicol Party-list Rep. Jil Bongalon shared similar sentiments with Roman.

“With regard to that issue, what we have is a retired Justice who is saying that we have already enough laws that would answer to these problems, but pakinggan ho natin ‘yung foreign investors, sinasabi nila we have restrictive economic provisions under [the] 1987 Constitution,” he said.

(However, let’s listen to foreign investors; they are saying that we have restrictive economic provisions under the 1987 Constitution.)

“Ibig sabihin, hindi ho sapat ‘yung mga batas na ipinapasa ho ng Kongreso para ma-encourage po ang ating foreign investors na mag-negosyo sa ating bansa. ‘Yun lamang po ang dapat na malinaw sa atin pong mga sambayanang Pilipino na, we have to amend the restrictive economic provisions; it is now the best time to amend our fundamental of the land,” said Bongalon.

(It means the laws passed by Congress are not enough to encourage foreign investors to do business in our country. That is the only thing that should be clear to us Filipinos: we have to amend the restrictive economic provisions. Now is the best time to amend our fundamental law.)

Both Roman and Bongalon, along with other lawmakers advocating for amending the 1987 Constitution, believe that lifting the economic restrictions in the Constitution would lead to a foreign investment boom in the country.

Carpio, during a Senate subcommittee on constitutional amendments and revision of codes’ hearing, noted a supposed “lack of understanding by our national leaders of the extent of foreign ownership, under the law, of businesses in our country.”

He highlighted the passage of numerous laws permitting 100 percent foreign ownership, even without amending the 1987 Constitution, emphasizing that the country possesses one of the most liberal foreign investment laws in Asia.