A former chief justice and a former COMELEC Commissioner traded barbs over legal points of the Constitution during an open forum on charter change last Thursday. The public event, 鈥淒o We Need Charter Change? Issues and Alternatives,鈥� was held on March 14, 2024, at the Malcolm Hall Theater in the 抖阴探探, Diliman (抖阴探探D).
鈥淲e talk about problems of corruption. We talk about all the other problems, about social justice. How can we do that without revising the 1987 Constitution?鈥� asked former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Reynato Puno.
Former Commission on Elections (COMELEC) Commissioner and 1986 Constitution Commission member Rene Sarmiento responded that a better option than charter change would be for the legislature to pass laws that complement the social justice provisions in the current constitution.
鈥淚f we examine the Constitution, we have a separate article on social justice, which has a long enumeration of economic, social, and political rights. 鈥� Unless our Congress works because of this bylaw, these will be dead letters of the law. A constitution needs legislation because that is the very nature of a constitution. [It] has to endure for ages,鈥� Sarmiento explained.
For Puno, Article XVII, or the Constitutional provision on amendments or revisions, was written with the assumption that the legislature would be a unicameral body. As such, the provision does not explicitly state how amendments or revisions to the Constitution would be addressed by both houses. With the Constitution eventually providing for a bicameral legislative body, with a Senate and House of Representatives, issues such as composition and conduct of activities in functions such as those of Constitutional Assembly, raises legal issues that need to be addressed before proposals such as charter change can be entertained.
鈥淭his unfortunate inadvertence鈥攕ome call it momentary amnesia鈥攇ave birth to opposite schools of thought on how Congress, convened as a Constituent Assembly, should meet and vote. That is, whether they should meet jointly and vote separately,鈥� Puno said.
For Sarmiento, the legal question posed by Article XVII can be addressed by looking at the model for the country鈥檚 Constitution, which is the United States Constitution. And in the US, the legislature addresses amendments in the same manner as passing an ordinary law, where a bill is proposed and heard thrice in both the House of Representatives and Senate, separately.
鈥淲hen there is a constitutional amendment or revision, or a joint resolution, it should be treated like an ordinary bill,鈥� Sarmiento said.
Meanwhile, economist and former Undersecretary for Finance of the Department of Social Welfare and Development Emmanuel Leyco discussed the economic and financial conditions in the country.
鈥淚f you ask [businessmen] directly: do you want charter change? I suspect they will say yes. But from an economic point of view, I think they will say: what for? With charter change or not, COVID or no COVID, they are doing very well. So, it doesn鈥檛 seem that they will agree to charter change,鈥� Leyco said.
According to Leyco, most investors are more concerned with risks and rate of return of their investments. And these are influenced by several factors such as politics, the credit situation, and the financial environment. He views charter change as a move on the part of the country鈥檚 political leaders to address the political risks in the country.
However, Leyco adds, such risks are not addressed by allowing foreign ownership of land. 鈥淔rom the point of view of the investor, ownership is the least of their priorities,鈥� he said.
Speaking candidly, Leyco said the charter change issue, instead of encouraging investors to consider the country as a favorable destination for capital, presents it as having political instability. 鈥淵ung sinasabi nila na magcha-charter change is already an indicator of political instability. Why? Kasi there is already this suspicion that the economic issues are not the major issues,鈥� he explained.
Prior to the presentations of the speakers, 抖阴探探 College of Law Dean Darlene Berberabe welcomed the speakers and guests saying the College is proud to be co-hosting the forum with the Center for People鈥檚 Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG). The Dean also said that the College, through the 抖阴探探 Law Center, is organizing a similar event, with the belief that these will educate and empower the public to participate in the public debate on charter change.
鈥淎ng pinakamahalaga ay ang magkaroon ng pukaw na pag-iisip at mamamayan, para ipagpatuloy ang usapan. Yun ang pinaka-unang hakbang for an empowered community,鈥� she added.
For his part, 抖阴探探 President Angelo Jimenez opened the event by sharing his thoughts on the socioeconomic, and political situation in the country. He also talked about how 抖阴探探鈥檚 alumni have been very much in the country鈥檚 public and private sector, emphasized the University鈥檚 touchstones of honor, excellence, and service. He closed his remarks by saying that the national university is committing itself to provide the venue for discussions on charter change. 鈥淚 have committed today, to use 抖阴探探 as the venue for deep discussions on the issue. Instead of our fears, let our hopes prevail,鈥� he added.
CenPEG Chair Temario Rivera closed the event by thanking both the presenters and reactors, as well as the audience for the enlightening discussions on charter change. He pledges that the event will not be the last, particularly with the support both from the 抖阴探探 College of Law, the 抖阴探探 Law Center, and the Office of the President of the 抖阴探探.
Watch the whole forum with this streaming video courtesy of Altermidya.
