Charter Change Debate?
Posted by butalidnl on 22 October 2006
The more I try to understand the so-called Philippine charter change debate, the more I realize that it is not a debate at all. The two sides are not talking about the same things, so there is no way of really weighing one side against the other. According to the pro charter change side, the shift to the unicameral-parliamentary system would streamline government, spur development, and make the country overcome corruption. The opponents of charter change point out to the so-called transitory provisions which provide for a concentration of power in the present president, the automatic extension of the terms of elected officials till 2010 (when many terms would have expired in 2007), and the concentration of power on the present legislators from the Senate and the House of Representatives.
On what, at first glance, is a side issue, there seems to at least be two sides. This is the issue of the national patrimony provisions. The charter change proposals of the House of Representatives and that of the Consultative Commission (ConCom) clearly want to open up ownership of land, natural resources, public utilities and mass media to foreigners, because according to them, this will result in national development etc. And of course, the opponents of charter change are saying that this will complete the sell-off of our national patrimony to foreigners, and that these steps will not result in economic gains for the country.
This clash on the issue of national patrimony is, in a sense, overblown. After all, hasn’t the present government already found ways to circumvent constitutional restrictions in order to get foreigners to operate and lease utilities and mining concessions? The thing that is now limiting the entry of foreign mining companies in the Philippines is the opposition from the Catholic church hierarchy, and not the Constitution. And I very much doubt whether opening up what little is still closed to foreign investment would spur economic development.
Thus, we are now saddled with a charter change non-debate.
And then, there is the more interesting (from the spectator’s point of view, that is) struggle regarding the technicalities of how to change the constitution. The House of Representatives is trying to push the point of a 2/3 vote as meaning 2/3 of the total members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, even if these legislators are all from the House of Representatives. This is a creative interpretation, and will be unique in the world – anywhere where the legislature has two chambers, they are required to get the required majority votes separately, unless the law specifically says that they should sit jointly for certain decisions. The House is trying to do everything to push their creative interpretation of the 2/3 vote requirement; but this will clearly get nowhere.
And the so-called peoples initiative is also getting stranded in a lot of legalese. It seems like it is anything but a peoples initiative, with all the government bodies tinkering with the process. It will indeed be a surprise if the Supreme Court accepts the Sigaw ng Bayan etc initiative as valid.
The charter change issue is clearly getting nowhere. But what can we conclude from all this?
First of all, it really seems like the whole charter change issue or debate is one giant smokescreen (or red herring, if one prefers that analogy). With both the content and the procedure going nowhere, why on earth is the government still pushing it? As long as all eyes are on the charter change issue, other issues including that of the Garci-tapes scandal become less prominent in the public eye. Also, legislators are less prone to be anti-charter change or anti-GMA because they have everything to gain if charter change “transitory provisions” are implemented.
The second conclusion that one could draw from the current charter change issue is that there seems to be a consensus that there is something wrong with the Philippine political system, and that it needs some radical changes. While many people don’t agree with the currently proposed set of amendments to the Constitution; a lot of these people are in favor of some changes, at least if these would help get rid of the corrupt and inept politicians currently running the country.
It is a pity that this underlying base of support for fundamental political change is being used by both sides in order to push their various short-term aims. What we need now is a call for genuine discussions on how best to design a political system that fits the Philippines today.
What we need now is a real debate on charter change.
ceasar said
I just want change. im already 28 years old but still our country are in lower status of living. What we want, better life, at this time do we have good life, no no and nothing will change from this day until the next generation still the same , our life always poor. If we will not try, nothing will change to your life. You want change, SACRIFICE! DONT THINK SO MUCH, JUST HAVE FAITH. Dont listen to those elite classes, decide for yourself.
Other politician oppose because there will be no elections on 2010, that is why they are afraid of charter change. Polician is a politician, they want to rule, be in position.
People of the Philippines, im just a simple guy, telling you take a look of the history of our country. We change the president, new president elected but still no change. No need to yearly change of president, the law must be change.
My taiwanese director said “along time ago Philippines economy is much better and very popular, he said during Marcos era. But this time its no good, and i said why. Your Country is too much free, no control of his people.
****
Im sorry this is what i observed.
That is why I want to have strict government. To control its people, to control the attitude of people, to control the economy.
CHANGE IS BETTER.
Kakit said
people of the Philippine, politicians… im sorry,, i am a pro cha cha!!! I think, this is the best way to help us poor filipinos to have a better life.. to have a chance to taste that life is not that cruel at all.!!!
I have observed as a college student… POOR became poorer… RICH became richer!!! the gap between the poor and the rich is getting far!!!
I WANT CHANGE!!!
laarni said
If we are to favor chacha, how sure we are of the CHANGES you guys are hoping for? Change is even temporary. Changing the constitution is not as simple as eating peanuts. Technically speaking, money, energy, time, effort are considered.
jeremiah baldemor said
i wonder why until now the spirit of charter change stay alive,if gloria was inspired by russia prime minister well she has no guts for that you spoiled brat daughter of former president is very unlike or diferent to pioneering my vladimir putin of russssssia
if your generals are acting like a kgb agent sorry its dream i just laughed every time i see sec ermita he pretended as if he was james bond or secret agent every time he was doing his announcement,
where is fidel ramos i understandhe settled in writing nice his former protege ermita gone wild hehe the president is asking for extension im sure that is the merit of charter change but people too are stupid ,why we allow this to happen why not ask the president to leave the office instead, my advice for gma its impossible to cheat time wheher you like it or not even if you succeed in your term time will come you cannot be forever leader to us such move will just agravate your accountability assuming you extend your term how long you will be stronger can you give guarantee that your successor is your son im sorry dont prolong your agony in malacanang 2010 is enough for you dont make gamble
im sure even military generals would not abide to you after 2010even you extend your term ,imagine marcos was powerful than you are that time ,he started serving us in good manner he overwhelmingly defeated your father in honest way but you i am not wodering how you handle us because at first you stole power then next yo cheated us if noli coveted your position im sure you were ousted ,also you are lucky this time we lack vigilant and charismaticleader if only fernando poe is alive im sure he will regain our trust to him and endthis mess sumasakit na tiyan ko
jeremiah baldemor said
let me take this moment for awhile ,i have my privelege to ask the
people of the country who is the third highest man in the country no lesss than the senate president ,where is logic if in the constitution the procedure to amend the law is 3/4 part of both senate and congress,require if that happened or if that is true then its now time to say that the third highest in the government is the speaker because if that is the reality then it means that upon the creation of 1987 constitution the senate has an expiry date while the congressis forever so i want to corrct the arrogance of lower congresss that 3/4 for each branch is require ,because in constitution both congress are respected as co equal branch its unwise to say that constitutionalist failed in that part ,i dont see any gray area or resrve thinking thats why impeachment case from lower needs 2/3 to elevate it to senate then in order to expulse the president 3/4 of the senate are required to remove the executive powerof the president for me congress was wrong in their interprtation or niloloko lang tayo i know constitution was made not for arrrogance of congress walang masama magpatuloy sa poder basta sa katotohanan lang kung ayw sa iyo ng tao pag bigyan ang iba si erap nga sinipa rin sabagay kasalanan nya to
jeremiah baldemor said
sana mag isip na si arroyo pasalamatan nya at nakaraos din siya
sa mga bishops na ayaw makinig sa atin bahala sila siguro may karapatan dion sila pero sana si mike velrde bro. erano manalo at
bro eddie villanueva magkaisa na kayo at hikayatin nyo po si ginang arroyo na gumawa ng tama hindi na kami umaasa sa simbahan ng pagbabago kayo na lang po ang tumugon sa mga obligasyon na naiwan ng namayapa na si cardinal sin
jeremiah baldemor said
sumusobra na mga linta ay lintik na yan yang si jdv
di ba xa ang ugat ng kapalpakakan buti nga sa kanya tuklawin sya ng alaga niya di ba siya ang nagturo kung paano paamuhin ang awlang prinsipyong mga kongresman sa tuwing may mpeachment kay sorry siya para sya kumuha ng bato at pinukpok sarili niya kaya mga obispo hwag kayo magbulag bulagan
na kunwa wala pakialam hwag naman sana kumubli sa health reproductive
jeremiah baldemor said
sour graping yan si jdv actually political survival lang yan dapat sumpain niya sarili niya dahil bangungot ang pangulo arroyo sa ala ala namin dapat mag alsa tayo sa 2010 ang botohan natin ay wala
sas mg oposisyon ano kaya kung si gov panlilio gayahin natin si barrack obama,o kaya si chiz escudero
basta ag lang siya pagamit kay danding teka gma nalimutan na pala ang coco levy na para sa maniniyog oy ng kongresman mas malaki ito kaysa sa bolante senado dapat hanapin ninyo mga pera ng maniniyog ,pag nakabasa kayo ng mensaheko an dapat sia iaip natin tuloy 2o10 at iboto ang sino man na mgbibigay ng hustiya sa pang aalipusta ng pangulo si dick gordon ,bayani fernando si belmonte ast sec teodoro mga tuta yan saka si noli mga galamay yan pero tiyak legarda ,escudero villar at lacson lalo na si erap hustiya pagbaabyarin nila iyon
roberth tautuan said
stop charter change,we need to change the government officials,not the type of governance.the problems are the Government officials who are corrupt enough.gma must stop making annomalies,the constitution states that”the right to make unions and decisions of the government are within the senate and the congress,but, sad to say,that the president had given the autority only to the congress in implementing charter change for almost the oficials under the congress is in the hand of her.therefore,gma violates the constitution and must be a subect to jail.stop her!..she is trying to implement charter change not for the development of our country but,for extending her term to earn more properties and to grab the money of the people.a female president is a cursed.wake up!filipinos.fight for our rights.
XYRUS ALBERT CURITANA said
i am a pro-cha cha.because for me this is the time to have a change.some of the people are saying that the cha cha will extend the term of president arroyo which is not true because in the parliament system if you don’t want the system or government of the prime ministe pwede mo syang tangalin within 6 months ng kanyang panunungkulan. and those who are anti cha-cha people try to think, matagal nang isinusulong ang charter change but lagi kayong kumokontra ng hindi nyo pinag iisipan kung ano yung pinaglalaban nyo.so what kung manirahan yung mga foreigner here in the philippines maganda nga yun kasi dadami ang dollars na papasok sa philippines.another thing is ayaw nyo na pumasok at magkaroon ng base militar dito.bakit kaya ba nating lumaban sa mga terorista?matututlungan pa nila tayo kung pano protektahan ang ating bansa. at ispin nyo kaya ayaw ng ibang politicians ng cha-cha kasi mawawala sila sa katungkulan dahil ang totoo sarili lng nila ang iniisip nla at hindi ang pang buong bansa..
im sorry but ito sa tingin ko ang mga dahilan…
TRY TO THINK.
clark kent said
sana huwag ng ipatuloy ang charter change sa bansa kasi yun kasi nagbibigay problema sa lahat