Lacson: Crazy to open the floodgates of Cha-cha now

MANILA, Philippines – It is unwise to “open the floodgate” for a broader change of the Charter (Cha-cha) if the goal, under the guise of reforming the party list system, is only to paralyze the progressive Makabayan bloc in the House of Representatives for their alleged communist ties, Senator Panfilo Lacson said Friday.

Lacson, chairman of the Senate national defense and security panel, warned his colleagues in Congress that amending the 1987 Constitution for such a specific goal could have consequences that even the proponents had not intended.

“If it is true that Malacañang’s wish is only directed at the Makabayan bloc in Congress for supposedly acting as legal and political fronts of the CPP-NPA (Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s Army), they should be a little more creative in achieving that goal without opening the floodgate to possibly play with the Constitution in its entirety, “he told the Inquirer.

The Makabayan opposition bloc is made up of representatives from Bayan Muna, Gabriela, ACT Teachers and Kabataan. Administration and security officials have labeled them as members of the CPP or sympathizers of the rebels.

“What makes (the charter change) less sensible or acceptable is when the purpose is directed at some groups on the list of parties that won their place in Congress based on an enabling law pursuant to it. Constitution that is being amended, ”Lacson said, referring to the Law of the Republic No. 7941, or the Law of the Party List System.

‘This problem’ with the reds

Senate President Vicente Sotto III previously said that President Duterte told congressional leaders in a meeting with military officials last November that “[wanted] this problem with the CPP-NPA solved. “

Sotto quoted the president as saying that the “best way” to solve that problem is to “eliminate the party list system or change it in the Constitution” through a constituent assembly.

Once established, the assembly “can seize the opportunity” to amend the economic provisions of the 1987 Constitution, Sotto said, still citing Mr. Duterte.

Limited to the economy

Sotto himself believes that the party list law might be easier to amend than the Constitution, which would require approval by a three-fourths majority of the Senate and House.

In a Viber message to the Inquirer, Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon agreed that amending the party list law was “a better and more practical route.”

In addition to reforming the party list system, administration lawmakers are seeking to lift some of the economic restrictions in the 1987 Constitution, such as limits on foreign ownership of land and various industries.

According to the representative of Ako Bicol, Alfredo Garbin Jr., chairman of the committee on constitutional amendments of the House of Representatives, the panel discussions that will resume on January 13 would be limited to the proposed changes in the economic provisions of the Constitution.

Garbin said his committee would address both House Resolution No. 2 introduced by House Speaker Lord Allan Velasco in July 2019.

RBH No. 2 would add the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” in various sections of Article XII (National Heritage and Economy), Article XIV (Education, Science and Technology, Art, Culture and Sports) and Article XVI (General Provisions ) of the Constitution.

These include provisions on restricting the ownership and management of media and educational institutions to Filipino citizens.

The proposed phrase would mean that the Filipino people are giving “permission” to Congress to enact “exceptions to the general rules” in particular economic provisions of the Constitution, Garbin said.

No warranty

Vicente Homer Revil, national president of the Constitutional Reform Movement, said that “there was no right time to eliminate the ‘restrictive’ economic provisions of the Constitution than now.”

But for Lacson, it would be “crazy” to believe that only the economic provisions and party list system would be subject to change.

“When we open the valve to reform the Constitution, especially through a constituent assembly, no one, not even the highest officials of the three powers of the State can choose, much less ensure what provisions can be reformed or not,” he said.

In December, two staunch Duterte allies, Senators Francis Tolentino and Ronald dela Rosa, presented their own RBH No. 2 to convene Congress in a constituent assembly to introduce “limited amendments” to the Constitution.

That sparked speculation that lawmakers were plotting to extend the term of the president and other officials and scrap the 2022 general election.

Bayan Muna representative Carlos Zárate said that Duterte’s desire to get rid of the party list system is only “a smokescreen for the actual political purpose behind this latest Cha-cha measure.”

“They use red labeling and terrorist labeling to ‘smoke a screen’ on their real agenda in this Cha-cha: extension of the term, lifting of term limits, elimination of anti-dynasty and other human rights and justice provisions. social, as well as the additional sale of our national patrimony to foreign powers such as China and the United States, ”said Zárate in a message to the Inquirer.

He warned that scrapping the party list system, instead of strengthening the representation of the real marginalized sectors, “would deprive the poor and abused sectors of a voice.”

It is not necessary

Senator Risa Hontiveros told the Inquirer that the problems with the party list law were in its implementation, “therefore, constitutional amendments are not necessary.” He also agreed with Sotto that amending the nearly 25-year-old law was the right approach.

House Vice Speaker Doy Leachon said he was “willing” to “impose rigid limitations” on the party list system, even though the president’s call was “still under discussion.”

“It is not a simple legislation. It requires constitutional amendment or revision, ”he said.

Taguig-Pateros representative Alan Peter Cayetano said there was no harm in discussing the party list system as long as the COVID-19 vaccination program was prioritized and fully implemented.

He said the problem that is being raised against the party list system is that “some enemies of the state” had allegedly joined it, but that could be resolved without amending the Constitution.

Cayetano pointed out that what the Constitution prohibited were not leftist ideologies, but the armed rebellion to overthrow the government.

“The Chamber says that the amendments have to do with economic provisions. But there is talk of extension of the mandate in the Chamber ”, said the former president. “Would you rather we talk about it or go back to vaccination for now? That’s my point. ” —WITH REPORTS FROM JULIE M. AURELIO AND DEXTER CABALZA

Read next