Con-con for Cha-cha to avoid Constitution’s ambiguities — solon

House of Representatives. (PNA photo by Joan Bondoc)

MANILA, Philippines — Instead of a constituent assembly (Con-ass), Antipolo 1st District Rep. Ronaldo Puno believes the best way to amend the 1987 Constitution is through a constitutional convention (Con-con) so that delegates would no longer have to concern themselves with ambiguities of the process.

In a privilege speech on Monday, Puno said that “historical experience” and “evolving exigencies of governance” force lawmakers to consider charter change (Cha-cha), or amending the Constitution’s wordings.

To do this in a transparent manner and with least interruption to lawmakers’ work, Puno said a Con-con — where the people would vote for delegates that would discuss amendments — will be better than a con-ass where members of Congress would sit.

READ: Many senators becoming lukewarm to push Cha-cha – Villanueva

“A Constitutional Convention (ConCon) offers the most prudent, transparent, and participatory mechanism to address these enduring ambiguities.  It allows the people, through their chosen delegates, to correct textual deficiencies, reconcile contradictions, remove ambiguities, institutionalize much-needed reform, and ensure that the foundational law of the land meets the needs of a dynamic and democratic society,” Puno said in his speech.

“A Constitutional Convention, ensures singularity of purpose, that is, to formulate and propose changes to the Constitution. Unlike a constituent Assembly, they will not be pre-occupied nor derailed with law-making, oversight functions and impeachment concerns,” he added.

Under the term of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., his allies in the House of Representatives including Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez have called for an economic Cha-cha between late 2023 to mid-2024, or when the 19th Congress was in office.

Economic provisions

Resolution of Both Houses (RBH) No. 7, a proposal for reforms in the Constitution’s economic provisions, was adopted by the House of Representatives.  If it was approved in a plebiscite, the amendments will open businesses in certain industries to foreign ownership.

However, the measure failed to get any traction at the Senate, primarily due to concerns that the Senate will be abolished, as the proposed amendments will be tackled through a con-ass, where both chambers of Congress will sit together and vote jointly on the proposed amendments.

With over 300 members in the House, the stand of 24 senators can easily be overwhelmed in case of a disagreement.

READ: Cha-cha on again: Changes to territorial, economic provisions pushed

Puno traced these concerns to how the 1987 Constitution was worded, as it seems that framers were aiming for a unicameral Congress — one where the Senate and the House sits as one body.

“Other provisions also require clarification. For instance, Article VI, Section 28, paragraph 4, which states that ‘no law granting any tax exemption shall be passed without the concurrence of a majority of all the Members of the Congress’, has led to interpretive confusion over whether Congress is to act as a joint body or in separate chambers,” he said.

“The wording also appears to presume a unicameral legislature, despite the fact that the Philippines has a bicameral Congress. This has implications not only for how tax exemption laws are passed, but also for determining quorum and voting thresholds in key fiscal decisions,” he added.

This is not the first time that the idea of “voting jointly” was questioned: Puno noted that when former president Benigno Aquino III granted amnesty to members of the Magdalo group, including former Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, there was a belief that “the Senate’s concurrence alone might suffice, while others believed bicameral concurrence was implied but procedurally undefined.”

The matter surfaced again, Puno said, when former president Rodrigo Duterte tried to revoke Trillanes’ amnesty.

“The lack of procedural clarity in Article VII, Section 19 has since been recognized as a source of institutional confusion, underscoring the need for textual correction,” he said.

`Constitutional wording’

“All these provisions exemplify the high costs of ambiguous constitutional wording. Left uncorrected, they generate procedural impasses, facilitate inconsistent enforcement, and ultimately degrade the Constitution’s reliability as the supreme law of the land,” he added.

These concerns will be addressed by pursuing a con-con instead of a con-ass according to the lawmaker.

“Through a ConCon, conflict of interest would be avoided, broader representation guaranteed, and risk of political expediency is reduced,” he said.  “Once again Mr. Speaker, this is not a call to discard the Constitution. It is a call to complete and correct it.”

For the 20th Congress, the House leadership has been mum about the prospects of Cha-cha.  However, last July 15, Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin filed RBH No. 1 to amend the 1987 Constitution’s provisions on national territory and economy.

Garbin said this is almost similar to what was filed and approved by the 18th and 19th Congress, save for proposals to change the territorial provisions.  According to Garbin, he wants to incorporate the award from the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016, which stated that the Philippines has exclusive rights over its waters.

Garbin and Manila 6th District Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. believe that even as the current administration is in the second half of its term, there is enough time to tackle Cha-cha proposals. /mr