“I do not know if we can convene immediately even if the resolution is approved today.” – Hon. Prospero Nograles, Speaker, House of Representatives

The approval of House Resolution No. 1109 (ConAss) has been met with everything but sobriety – even the very leadership of the House of Representative has failed to comprehend its approval in the light of the provisions of the very Constitution they seek to amend.

It is unfortunate that most of our Representatives never attempted to understand where ConAss lies in the Constitutional scheme of things. However, it is even more unfortunate if we resort to labels identifying ourselves as ‘Anti-ChaCha’ and placards articulating our ‘No to ConAss’ without an appreciation of the dynamics in our Constitution, however flawed it may seem to many.

Charter Change refers to either the revision or amendment of the Constitution. Amendment would refer to ‘isolated or piecemeal change only’ while revision would pertain to a ‘revamp or rewriting’ [Cruz, 1996]. Article XVII provides that both involve two (2) steps – proposal and ratification.

Constituent Assembly (ConAss) is among the modes of proposing either amendments or revisions to the Constitution. A reading of the Article would show that there are the three modes for proposing changes: (a) Constituent Assembly [Section 1 (1)]; (b) Constitutional Convention [Section 1(2)]; or (c) by a People’s Initiative [Section 2].

For the first mode, Congress – and by ‘Congress’ we mean not merely the House of Representatives but must necessarily include the Senate – may convene itself into a Constituent Assembly ‘upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members’ [Emphasis mine.] As ConAss, the Senate and House of Representatives become a constituent body exercising special power to formulate a new constitution or propose amendments to the constitution. A caveat though, our Constitution does not explicitly state whether the two houses of Congress will be voting jointly or separately.

Congress may call for a Constitutional Convention (ConCon) ‘by a vote of two-thirds of all its Members’ or by a simple majority vote, Congress can submit the decision (on whether or not to call a ConCon) to the electorate. [Again, emphasis mine.] Under ConCon, it is imperative that the delegates to the ConCon is from a direct election by the people. The number of delegates is entirely the discretion of Congress.

Finally, proposals may also be made by our own initiative. We, the People, may directly propose amendments to the Constitution upon petition of at least 12% of all registered voters, and provided that every legislative district is represented by at least 3% of its registered voters. The last sentence in Section 2 of Article XVII makes it imperative for Congress to enact legislation to implement this provision.

Congress has the sole discretion to decide on which mode to employ in proposing changes to the Charter, save, perhaps, for the third mode on People’s Initiative. Be as it may, Article XVII makes it imperative that the product of either ConCon or ConAss must be submitted to the people for ratification through a referendum. [Section 4]

Finally, the Supreme Court, even after Congress has convened itself into a ConAss, can still strike down such measure if it appears that the conditions precedent to the convening of the ConAss was attended with ‘grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction’. [Section 1, Article VIII] Hence, even if it is the sole discretion of Congress to choose which mode of proposing changes to the Charter, the Supreme Court can still come in and strike down such as unconstitutional.

In other words, while we may rage against the railroading of the ConAss resolution by our Honorable Representatives (Aside: I cringe whenever I hear them refer to themselves as ‘representatives’ – they seldom genuinely represent our interests), we must do so in the light of what the Constitution actually provides. Although we are all glad that we, as a people, are edifying ourselves (about time that we do) with the provisions of our Constitution and are engaging in healthy debates, let us not fall prey to our emotions.

The House of Representatives may have passed the resolution but such would remain meaningless if the Senate refuses to pass an equivalent resolution. Again, Mr. Speaker, without a similar move by the Senate, the resolution doesn’t mean anything and you cannot ‘convene immediately’.

Again, this is a call for sobriety. If we do not want ConAss as a mode of proposing changes to our Constitution, then let us make sure the men and women who are supposed to represent our opposition would, in fact, represent our sentiments. If not, let us turn to our Senators – Senators Arroyo and Pimentel have categorically stated that the Senate will not pass a similar resolution. If the Senate fails us, the Supreme Court has proven time and again that it heeds reason and fairness.

For our readers’ reference, here’s a list of some of those bills and resolutions, and their principal authors.

Taken from the House of Representatives Committee on Constitutional Amendments:

HB01752 – AN ACT CONSTITUTING A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO AMEND OR REVISE THE PRESENT CONSTITUTION, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, authored by Raul Gonzales, jr (LAKAS-CMD, Lone District Iloilo City)

HB01876 – AN ACT CALLING FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION AND POSTPONEMENT OF THE 2007 BARANGAY ELECTIONS, authored by Carmelo Lazatin (LAKAS-CMD, 1st District Pampanga)

HB02158 – THE CONSTITUTION REFERENDUM ACT OF 2007, authored by Pryde Henry Teves, (LAKAS-CMD, 3rd District Negros Oriental)

HB02479 – AN ACT PROVIDING FOR PEOPLE’S INITIATIVE TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION, authored by Roque Ablan, jr, (LAKAS-CMD, 1st District Ilocos Norte)

HB03149 – AN ACT CALLING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION FOR CHANGING THE 1987 CONSTITUTION, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFORE, authored by Abraham Kahlil Mitra (NPC, 2nd District Palawan)

HB03473 – AN ACT CALLING FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION COINCIDING WITH THE 2010 NATIONAL ELECTIONS, authored by Carmelo Lazatin (LAKAS-CMD, 1st District Pampanga)

HB04075 – AN ACT IMPLEMENTING HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 17 OF THE CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES CALLING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS TO, OR REVISION OF, THE 1987 CONSTITUTION AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR, authored by Victor Francisco Ortega (LAKAS-CMD, 1st District, La Union)

HCR0003 – RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION, authored by Felix Alfelor, jr (KAMPI, 4th District Camarines Sur)

HCR0006 – CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS TO, OR REVISION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND PROVIDING FOR THE ELECTION OF DELEGATES IN NOVEMBER 2008 TO COINCIDE WITH THE BARANGAY ELECTIONS, authored by Edelmiro Amante (KAMPI, 2nd District Agusan del Norte)

HCR0007 – CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS TO, OR REVISION OF, THE CONSTITUTION AND PROVIDING FOR THE ELECTION OF DELEGATES TO COINCIDE WITH THE ELECTION OF BARANGAY OFFICIALS IN OCTOBER 2007, authored by Antonio Cuenco (PROMDI-BOPK-LAKAS, 2nd District Cebu City)

HCR0010 – CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONSTITUTING BOTH HOUSES INTO A CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION LIFTING THE TERM LIMIT FOR MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND ELECTIVE LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICIALS, authored by Jose Solis (KAMPI, 2nd District Sorsogon)

HCR0015 – CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION TO ESTABLISH A FEDERAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT THROUGH CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OR BY CONVENING CONGRESS INTO A CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY, authored by Monico Puentavella (LAKAS-CMD, Lone District, Bacolod City)

HCR0017 – A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS TO, OR REVISION OF, THE 1987 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, authored by Victor Francisco Ortega (LAKAS-CMD, 1st District, La Union)

HCR0018 – A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CALLING ON THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO CONSTITUTE THEMSELVES AS A CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY TO INTRODUCE AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION, authored by Roque Ablan, jr, (LAKAS-CMD, 1st District Ilocos Norte)

HCR0019 – A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION TO CONVENE THE CONGRESS INTO A CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVISING THE CONSTITUTION TO ESTABLISH A FEDERAL SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, authored by Edelmiro Amante (KAMPI, 2nd District Agusan del Norte)

HJR0014 – JOINT RESOLUTION TO CONVENE THE CONGRESS INTO A CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVISING THE CONSTITUTION TO ESTABLISH A FEDERAL SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, authored by Antonio Cuenco (PROMDI-BOPK-LAKAS, 2nd District Cebu City)

HJR0015 – JOINT RESOLUTION TO CONVENE THE CONGRESS INTO A CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVISING THE CONSTITUTION TO ESTABLISH A FEDERAL SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, authored by Faysah Dumarpa (LAKAS-CMD, 1st District Lanao del Sur)

HR00056 – RESOLUTION CALLING FOR THE ADOPTION BY THE HOUSE OF CONGRESS OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONSULTATIVE COMMISSION, authored by Jose Solis (KAMPI, 2nd District Sorsogon)

HR00548 – PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO PROMOTE EFFICIENCY IN GOVERNANCE BY UNITING THE EXECUTIVE AND LEGISLATIVE FUNCTIONS OF GOVERNMENT BY AMENDING SECTION 13, ARTICLE VI AND SECTION 16, ARTICLE VII OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION, authored by Hermilando Mandanas (LP, 2nd District Batangas)

HR00550 – PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO IMPROVE GOVERNANCE BY CHANGING THE TERM OF OFFICE OF LOCAL ELECTIVE OFFICIALS EXCEPT BARANGAY OFFICIALS, AND MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THREE (3) TO FOUR (4) YEARS AND TO SYNCHRONIZE LOCAL AND NATIONAL ELECTIONS BY AMENDING SECTION 7, ARTICLE VI; SECTION 8, ARTICLE X; AND SECTION 2, ARTICLE XVIII OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION, authored by Hermilando Mandanas (LP, 2nd District Batangas)

HR00567 – RESOLUTION TO CONVENE THE CONGRESS INTO A CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVISING THE CONSTITUTION TO ESTABLISH A FEDERAL SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, authored by Rufus Rodriguez (PMP-UNO, 2nd District Cagayan de Oro)

HR00730 – RESOLUTION TO CONSTITUTE THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES INTO A CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DRAFTING AND PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO, OR REVISION OF, THE 1987 CONSTITUTION PARTICULARLY TO ESTABLISH A UNICAMERAL CONGRESS, authored by Adam Relson Jala (LAKAS-CMD, 3rd District Bohol)

HR00737 – RESOLUTION PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO SECTIONS 2 AND 3, ARTICLE XII OF THE CONSTITUTION TO ALLOW THE ACQUISITION BY FOREIGN CORPORATIONS AND ASSOCIATIONS, AND THE TRANSFER OF CONVEYANCE THERETO, OF ALIENABLE PUBLIC LANDS AND PRIVATE LANDS, authored by Prospero Nograles (LAKAS-CMD, 1st District Davao City)

HR00739 – RESOLUTION TO CONVENE THE CONGRESS INTO A CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVISING THE CONSTITUTION TO ESTABLISH A FEDERAL SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, authored by Jose Solis (KAMPI, 2nd District Sorsogon)

HR00769 – RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS AND REVISIONS TO THE 1987 CONSTITUTION, authored by Pedro Romualdo (LAKAS-CMD, Lone District Camiguin)

HR00819 – RESOLUTION TO CONVENE A JOINT SESSION OF CONGRESS TO REVISE THE CONSTITUTION AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, authored by Nur Jaafar (LAKAS-CMD, Lone District Tawi-tawi)

Here are a couple from the Senate as well:

SBN-1733 AN ACT PROVIDING FOR PEOPLE’S INITIATIVE TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION, authored by Miriam Defensor-Santiago

SBN-1230 AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A SYSTEM OF PEOPLE’S INITIATIVE TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION, authored by Richard Gordon

Enjoy!

In and out of the web, I’ve talked informally with family and friends. Asking and testing what they think about our time. I know it is far from a scientific sampling. In my most recent post, I also asked if you are in favor of impeaching Arroyo.

The most common theme in people’s responses to me is their expectation for an election in 2010. That is when they want a change in President. They do not want a change now because there is no one they trust. They do not support impeachment even though they believe the charges are right because it would simply be like throwing a pebble at an incoming 747.

Their responses does not by far say that they like Arroyo.
The people that I asked, can be found grumbling in front of the evening news at the sheer incompetence of those in charge. They find it incredulous as scandal after scandal come out that the ones on top of the food chain have such rampant and blatant disregard and who pervert and bend the law to their will. Ask them about BJE-MOA and people from Mindanao would be vehemently opposed to it. Given that perhaps in any normal day, the unconstitutional nature of BJE-MOA and such abuse might have been grounds enough for impeachment and conviction. We can safely say that these are not normal and is an unsettling time. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that.

The opposition has a credibility issue. An issue, one might add they’ve not been able to shake out of since FPJ and has since become worst. They are perceived as no better than Arroyo and her ilk. That incredible mistrust hurts any measure they wish the people would support whether impeachment or election. It isn’t apathy— it is more neutrality. Neither Arroyo nor Opposition has their side.

The people are fully aware of how things go. Whether it is local politics— where people make money out of everyday and know the scope and breathe of it. Our people know that it is a politics of who you know and ultimately, money talks.

People have come to realize that national life is simply local politics writ large. And this realization simply proves and point that there is no distinction between Arroyo and Opposition. The disastrous result of past EDSAs and the failure of impeachment have more than galvanized the resolve of our people to fully expect an election in 2010.

The political landscape has hardly changed since 2004.

Everybody with a mind can clearly see that our national life is like one old machine, rusting on the seems and filled with patch work. It is not efficient but somehow, it moves along. The state of this machine, whether our assumptions of what a Republic and social justice is as framed to be the foundation of our national life is flawed. But clearly such judgment is for the collective will of the people to decide upon.

Especially as Arroyo pwns the Supreme Court as Justices retire, the fear of charter change as driven by Arroyo is not a fantasy. It is a clear and present danger that one such as her and her ilk who have gamed politics would bend permanently the very soul of our Republic and shape the future is even more so frightening. Clearly, they aim to tighten their control over this Republic. To unravel this Gordian Knot, perhaps it is this fear that we must face head on.

Ask our people in 2010— will you call for a Constitutional Convention?

Such push from the Heroes of past EDSAs would mean for their generation to accept they have failed. That their vision is flawed. That their brand of social justice is a failure. Don’t you think, 20 years is enough?

Yes, such acceptance would mean the final nail in the coffin, death to a Republic born out of Marcos’ years. Yes, it is akin to watching Rome burn. Perhaps, watching Manila burn is what this Nation needs. Our people need to see our Republic to be reborn from the ashes of the old. At the end of the day, all this is but conjecture.

Ask our people! Settle the issue once and for all!

With our politics, as a mashup between reality show and soap opera, those who are serious to change and challege the status quo must meet it head on, with courage! It starts at the local level. Our people believe in democracy. It is election they put their trust in. For so long as the political bench remain as shallow and hapless, change will be but a myth and politics would remain the providence of those who have usurped it for their own selfish interest. That’s where the wind blows.