Solons laud Marcos, ex-Pres. Duterte for agreeing on economic Cha-cha

MANILA, Philippines — Lawmakers from the House of Representatives have expressed relief that President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and former President Rodrigo Duterte now agree on pushing for amendments in the 1987 Constitution’s economic provisions.

According to South Cotabato 2nd District Rep. Peter Miguel, having two influential political personalities like Marcos and Duterte be on the same page regarding economic Charter change (Cha-cha) is a big deal because it shows that the country should move forward with the proposed amendments.

Miguel and other lawmakers were asked about Duterte’s recent statements that he is not against Charter change if this would be on economic provisions only.

“This is a big deal, the pronouncement of former President Digong, because if we will think about this, just last week, he was against this,” Miguel said in a press briefing at the House complex on Wednesday.

“It’s a complete turnaround, and it’s a big cue for us that the two influential persons of the country now — our sitting President PBBM and former President saying Cha-cha is good so long as we will amend economic provisions (only),” he added.

Miguel said this may already be the last piece of the puzzle, as it can also be taken as an indication to both the House and the Senate that the economic Charter change should continue.

The House is currently conducting hearings by a committee of the whole on the Resolution of Both Houses (RBH) No. 7, which proposes amendments to three provisions in the 1987 Constitution.  The Senate is also holding hearings on RBH No. 6 — which the House’s RBH No. 7 was patterned after.

“This is good, actually; maybe this is the last piece of the puzzle which states that both the House and the Senate should push through; there is no roadblock as long as we amend economic provisions only.  And we here in Congress, we’re true to our commitment to the economic provisions alone.  It’s specific to Article 12, 14, 16,” he noted.

Davao Oriental 2nd District Rep. Cheeno Miguel Almario meanwhile said this recent development — weeks after Marcos and Duterte traded barbs — is a breath of fresh air.

“With regards to (the) former President’s statement, it is a breath of fresh air to us lawmakers as it is a sign that okay, we now see eye-to-eye — both presidents, former President and our current President PBBM, see eye-to-eye. The legislative body also sees eye-to-eye,” Almario said.

“The thing is, when these proposed constitutional amendments, or at least in our case, when the Committee of the whole has presented these changes, the intention was never, wasn’t with vested interest in the first place.  It was to really further improve the economic standpoint of the country,” he added.

READ: Too late for economic Cha-cha, analysts say 

Anakalusugan party-list Rep. Ray Reyes meanwhile reminded the public that when President Marcos made “unity” his government platform, it did not mean preventing any dissenting opinions on government policy.

“That’s good news, that our former President is now open to the proposed economic provision amendments in Charter change.  I think when you look at it from before when this administration was formed, we were always, or the President has espoused a single word that encompasses how we want to move forward for a better Philippines — which is unity,” Reyes said.

“But we never really meant that unity is a unilateral no-take-no-prisoners approach, one direction only, we will not take any other dissenting opinion.  Unity is a process of actually getting each and everybody’s viewpoints and having this respectful debate in a manner that is displayed to the public that we are finding all of these means for the betterment of our people,” he added.

Under RBH No. 7 and the Senate’s RBH No. 6 only economic provisions would be amended:

• Section 11 of Article XII (National Patrimony and Economy), where the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” is inserted in the provision that bars foreign ownership of a public utility shall except in a case where 60 percent of the total capital belongs to Filipino citizens
• Section 4 of Article XIV (Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture, and Sports) where the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” is inserted in the provision that bars foreign ownership of basic educational institutions except in a case where 60 percent of the total capital belongs to Filipino citizens.
• Section 11 of Article XVI (General Provisions) where the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” is inserted in two portions: first, the provision that bars foreign ownership in the advertising industry except in a case where 70 percent of the total capital belongs to Filipino citizens; and in the provision that limits foreign investors participation in entities to how much their capital share is.

With reports from Barbara Gutierrez, INQUIRER.net intern