The House of Representatives is all set for Charter change debates on January 13.
Ako-Bicol party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin confirmed this Friday but assured the public the whole process of introducing amendments to the economic provisions of the 1987 Constitution would be transparent and would follow the legislative process.
Garbin said Speaker Lord Allan Velasco gave a clear instruction that the constitutional amendments would focus only on the restrictive economic provisions of the 33-year-old Charter.
“The directive of Speaker Velasco is clear; that we need to confine our discussion (to the) economic provisions. At the end of the day, the Filipino people will have the power of ratification. They will be the one to ratify the amendments in a plebiscite,” Garbin said.
Under Resolution of Both Houses 2 authored by Velasco, the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” will be added to the restrictions set by the Constitution on ownership of franchises and public utilities.
This developed as Garbin defended the move of Congress to attend to Cha-cha proposals amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Garbin said Vice President Leni Robredo’s spokesperson Barry Gutierrez was wrong in saying the chamber’s efforts at amending economic provisions in the Constitution was a waste of the people’s time and money.
“The devastating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the local economy has brought to light the need to amend the restrictive economic provisions of our 33-year-old Constitution that impede the inflow of funds and investments crucial to enable us recover from the havoc brought upon by this public health crisis,” Garbin said.
“And if we want to better position the Philippines, Charter change must happen now because our economy is still a long way from full recovery,” he added.
Garbin stressed his panel would treat the proposed measure to amend what he described as the stifling economic provisions just like any other bill taken up in the plenary — “with fairness and transparency.”
“Just like other pieces of legislation passed within the chamber of Congress, it will go through the legislative process and will be voted upon nominally by each member of the House of Representatives,” said Garbin.
Garbin’s panel will begin its deliberations on Charter change a week before it resumes session on January 18.
The committee hopes to finish deliberations before Christmas of 2021, and to schedule the plebiscite in time for the 2022 National Elections, Garbin said.
Garbin also moved to allay concerns that Congress would touch on the political provisions in the Constitution, particularly term limits or term extension.
Meanwhile, Senator Panfilo Lacson said if indeed true the reason of President Rodrigo Duterte for reviving efforts to amend the 1987 Constitution was to abolish the party-list system, or at least directed at a particular group of party-list list groups, the charter change route “might be a bit too big a bite to take.”
“Why? When we open the valve to amend the Constitution, especially via a Constituent Assembly, nobody, not even the highest officials of the three branches of government can choose,” said Lacson.
He also said there was no assurance which provisions of the Constitution might be amended or not.
“If it’s true that Malacañang’s wish is only aimed at the Makabayan bloc in Congress for allegedly acting as legal and political fronts of the CPP-NPA, they should be a little bit more creative in accomplishing that objective without opening the floodgate to possibly tinker with the Constitution in its entirety,” said Lacson.
Senate President Vicente Sotto III also said the President wanted to get rid of the party-list system as the majority of them were perceived as sympathizers of the CPP-NPA.
“The President has been very hot on the CPP-NPA issue and their sympathizers, majority of whom are partylist,” he said.
Meanwhile, an all-senators caucus will discuss how to move forward on the Senate resolution to amend the 1987 Constitution, said Senator Francis Pangilinan, chairperson of the Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes and Laws.
“As was our approach in the previous Congress, it would be best if the matter be tackled and discussed first in an all-Senators Caucus wherein a consensus as to how to move forward hopefully can be reached,” said Pangilinan.
“In fairness to the Charter change proponents the resolution was filed prior to the PSG vaccine controversy,” he said, referring to the controversy of the Presidential Security Group receiving a COVID vaccine from China still to be tested and approved by the Food and Drug Administration for safety and efficacy.
Pangilinan raised concerns about the timing of the resolution, noting that all-government focus must be on controlling and managing the disease so that the country could get back on its feet.
He said among the issues that could be discussed in the caucus would be the timing of charter amendments considering that the country was facing “the worst economic and health crisis in recent memory.”
On whether he would conduct public consultations similar to the ones he conducted in the last Congress, Pangilinan said it would depend on the discussions during the caucus. “Let’s hear out the sentiments of our fellow senators).”
Past survey results showed that a sizable majority of Filipinos are opposed to changing the 1987 Constitution.
Last December 7, 2020, Senators Francis Tolentino and Ronald dela Rosa filed Resolution of Both Houses No. 2 which seeks to convene the 18th Congress as a Constituent Assembly to amend several provisions of the 1987 Constitution citing “mounting economic & health concerns brought about by the pandemic.
In the resolution, the two administration senators said reforms needed to be introduced to the 33-year old Constitution “to aid the country in achieving economic growth, especially during this time of rising global uncertainty.”
The resolution states that the amendments proposed are only “limited to the provisions on democratic representation and the economic provisions of the Constitution.”