Senate claim of ‘paid’ people’s initiative a dud – House exec

House Deputy Speaker and Quezon Rep. David Suarez urged the public on Thursday to be more discerning amid “baseless” claims that people were being paid or coerced into signing the petitions for a people’s initiative (PI) to amend the 1987 Constitution.

During a Senate hearing on Tuesday led by Sen. Imee Marcos, several witnesses from Bukidnon and Quezon City were presented to testify on allegations that bribes were being offered in exchange for people’s signatures.

Suarez, however, said that although the witnesses admitted receiving P1,500, they clarified that the money was for their role as coordinators to gather signatures, not for signing the petition.

“In short, the Senate’s claim that the signature drive was a ‘paid initiative’ is nothing but a dud,” he added.

Burden of proof

According to Suarez, the burden of proof should be on those saying that the signatures gathered so far for the people’s initiative were either fake, paid for, or the result of coercion.

Suarez also challenged the Senate’s description of the PI as “fake” or a “politicians’ initiative, saying the lack of proof to back up their claim of money changing hands could be part of some senators’ efforts to “delegitimize” the signature campaign.

He said that a people’s initiative was one of the legal modes for proposing constitutional amendments under the law.

At the same time, Suarez called out Marcos for urging the Commission on Elections to throw out the signatures it had received so far, saying it was a “blatant disregard” for and an “egregious violation” of the democratic process and people’s right to seek constitutional reforms.

Angara: Nothing political

Meanwhile, Sen. Juan Edgardo Angara assured that no political amendments would be tackled as senators began deliberating on Monday on the proposed resolution seeking to amend the constitution’s economic provisions.

“We will focus on the contents of the resolution … so we can have a focused and limited discussion,” said Angara, referring to Resolution of Both Houses (RBH) No. 6. “No discussion of political amendments.”He added that the Senate deliberations would be limited to economic amendments “unlike in the people’s initiative, which sets no limit.”

RBH 6 seeks constitutional reforms in three economic provisions: Articles 12, 14, and 16, which restrict foreign ownership of public utilities, educational institutions, and the advertising industry.

Angara, Senate President Juan Miguel Zubiri and Senate President Pro Tempore Loren Legarda jointly filed the resolution on Jan. 15 partly in response to concerns about the people’s initiative, which allegedly had the backing of the House leadership.

Earlier, the Senate created a subcommittee under its committee on constitutional amendments and revision of codes to tackle RBH 6.

The subcommittee chair Angara said they would invite “a wide sector of society and the political spectrum to ensure healthy discussion and debate.” Zubiri said they would ask retired Supreme Court justices and other legal luminaries, including those supporting Charter change (Cha-cha), to participate in the hearings.

Caution from CBCP

For its part, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) cautioned people against signing the circulating petitions for the people’s initiative, noting that only “a few public servants” were behind the latest move to amend the 1987 Constitution.

“We are concerned about the reports of signatures gathered across the country for a so-called people’s Initiative. Many could sign for various reasons, but it is clear that their signing is not the result of a careful study and discussion,” it said in a statement issued on Wednesday night and signed by its president, Caloocan Bishop Pablo Virgilio David.

“It seems that this people’s initiative was initiated by a few public servants and not truly from the initiative of ordinary citizens. If that is the case, it involves deception and disregard for our true and free participation in the democratic process of our country. Is that good?” it asked. —With reports from Jerome Aning and Tina G. Santos