Experts favor move to revisit the 1987 Constitution

MANILA, Philippines (PNA) -– The debates on whether or not to change the 1987 Constitution is expected to start in the Senate soon after majority of the majority of constitutional law experts supported a revived move for Charter change.

During the Thursday’s Senate forum entitled “The Necessity for Charter Change”, former Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato Puno said that with all the problems confronting the country, it is timely to revisit the 24-year-old Constitution.

”With a new government, led by a newly-elected President who is currently enjoying a high trust rating and who has publicly disavowed running again for public office, I honestly believe that it is time to discuss again constitutional change,” said Puno, one of the six lecturers in the two-hour forum held at the Senate session hall.

Actually, Puno gave four possible recommendations, including the shift of the form of government from presidential to parliamentary, which he believes could “serve the desire of our people for more peace, more progress and more prosperity.”

”It is apparent that the President is the ultimate center of gravity in government. While neat in paper, it (presidential form) is messy in reality. It has also escalated the cost of elections. This imbalance of power needs correction and some fine-tuning,” Puno said.

Puno said the concept of federalism “holds the key to the solution of some of our major problems, including the imperative need to put closure to the separatist movement in Mindanao.”

The former chief justice stressed that changing the legislative structure from bicameral to unicameral is necessary even as he suggested the creation of Constitutional court which is distinct and separate from the Supreme Court.

”We belong to the minority of countries without a Constitutional Court because we copied the US Supreme Court model,” Puno said.

Aside from Puno, other resource persons include former Justice Vicente Mendoza; University of the Philippines (UP) college of law dean Dr. Jose Abueva; former Justice Adolfo Azcuna; UP law professor Merlin Magallona and Justice Florentino Feliciano.

Mendoza and Abueva stressed the need to change the constitution specifically the shifting from presidential to parliamentary form of government while Magallona and Azcuna said they are open to revisit the constitution.

”A parliamentary system of government concentrates political power at the highest level of authority through the Prime Minister and his cabinet and prevents the abuse of power by making the government dependent on popular support for its existence,” Mendoza said.

Abueva said the presidential government is ‘fragmented’ since neither the President, the Senate, or the House of Representatives is accountable to the people as institutions.

”The people cannot hold the President accountable because he has a fixed term of six years with no reelection. He may be removed only by impeachment,” Abueva said.

Magallona said constitutional change must affirm that ‘the fundamental law be framed under the aegis of overriding principle of sustainable development.’

Azcuna, on the other hand, discussed the procedures on how the Charter change would be implemented, specifically on the required votes from among members of two houses of Congress.

”It is only upon ratification by the majority of the votes of the people cast in a plebiscite called for that purpose that the proposed amendments or revisions become valid and effective as Charter change,” Azcuna said.

Meanwhile, Feliciano said modifying the Constitution would not guarantee that problems will be wiped out.

”A constitution is only a general structural framework of government. Typically, it provides no detailed recipe for action,” Feliciano said.

Feliciano said the legislative body can create laws that would boost the economic development without violating the Constitution.

Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago, chair of the Senate committee on constitutional amendments, revisions of codes and laws that conducted the forum, thanked the resource persons whom, she said, provided clearer picture on whether or not to change the constitution.

”After listening to the lectures of our distinguished resource persons, I’m convinced also that there is really a need to revisit our Constitution because these people know better because they are some of the country’s brightest men,” Santiago said.

Santiago said she will report the results of the inaugural Senate public hearing to the Senate committee on constitutional amendments, hoping to get approval of the panel members to start plenary debates on the proposed Charter change.

While some senators prefer the formation of constituent assembly to change the constitution, Santiago said constitutional convention composed of law experts would be more viable to protect the process from any vested interest of the Congress members.

The Senate’s initial hearing on the proposed Charter change has been attended by some members of the Senate, House of Representatives, students, law deans and professors, civic organizations and non-government organizations on constitutional law.