MikeLigalig.com

WHAT’S REALLY THE TUNE?
Published: December 03, 2006 by The Bohol Standard
By Atty. Check Baluma

A few weeks ago, the Supreme Court, voting 8-7, turned down the Motion for Reconsideration filed by the proponents of People's Initiative. The decision of the High Court was not surprising, since, as expected, no Justice made a 360° turn. While Speaker Jose de Venecia revealed the plans of Sigaw ng Bayan and the strong Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines ( ULAP) to file a second motion for reconsideration before the Supreme Court, surprisingly now, the move to amend the Constitution has changed battle field.

It was reported that the proponents of people’s initiative were banking on the appointment of a new Chief Justice who would give them the swing vote, as our present Chief Justice, who is set to retire on December 7, 2006 voted against the initiative. But from the looks of things, the appointment of a new Chief Justice might take some time, as there appears a clash between the Judicial and Bar Council and the nominees to the exalted position of Chief Justice, which might have caused the proponents of Charter Change to change plans and shift their sights on a different battle field.

The appointment of a new Chief Justice might not be coming soon, if the Judicial and Bar Council insists on their newly formulated rules requiring nominees for Chief Justice to be subjected to a public interview for the sake of transparency. Last Wednesday, November 29, 2006, the five senior associate justices of the Supreme Court who were all candidates for the soon to be vacant position of Chief Justice did not attend the first ever public interview set by the Judicial and Bar Council. One candidate for Chief Justice went even to the extent of giving his view that the public interview is a mere circus. The sixth and last candidate, Senator Miriam Defensor – Santiago came for the public interview but in a great display of delicadeza and sense of fairness, did not allow herself to be interviewed since she does not want her rivals to be at a disadvantaged. In the light of these development, Senator Francis Pangilinan, a member of the Judicial and Bar Council, has mulled the idea of disqualifying all the earlier determined nominees for their failure to appear for public interview. Clearly, there is no express provision under our Constitution requiring nominees for the position of Chief Justice to undergo a public interview, but Senator Pangilinan insists that since there are rules promulgated by the JBC, the same must be followed. This writer shares this view that in the appointment of the new Chief Justice, it would be more wise to closely consider more a nominee’s track record and performance rather than on what a nominee would answer in a public interview, more so that the duration of the interview is limited only to thirty minutes.

Speaker Jose de Venecia told reporters last Wednesday, November 29, 2006 that our country will have a new Constitution “ in 15 days”. “ We will have a Charter that shifts the nation to the parliamentary system and replaces Congress with a unicameral parliament by December 15,” he added. This open declaration of the Speaker of the House of Representatives certainly has created an impression to the public that perhaps the second motion for reconsideration of the denial of the People’s Initiative by our Supreme Court might not be forthcoming as another mode of amending the charter is being mobilized.

Since the option of amending our present Constitution in Sec. 2 of Article XVII appears no longer possible, as the Supreme Court has remained firm with its decision to deny the Petition for a People’s Initiative, the other modes of amendment or revision of the Constitution may be the next options available.

Section 1 of our Constitution states that: “ Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution may be proposed by:

(1) The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members;

(2) A constitutional convention.”

“Sec. 3 The Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of all its Members, call a constitutional constitution, or by a majority vote of all its Members, submit to the electorate the question of calling such a convention.”

Former Supreme Court Associate Justice Isagani A. Cruz, a highly respected and admired author, bar reviewer and Constitutional Law expert, in his book “ Philippine Political Law” opined that-

“ Where what is intended is a mere amendment or change of particular provisions only, the proposal is better made by direct legislative action. In this case the vote of at least three-fourths of all the members of the Congress shall be needed. This method will avoid the unnecessary expenditure of public funds and time that the calling of a constitutional convention will entail.

But if what is envisioned is the overhaul of the entire Constitution, it is advisable to entrust the task to a constitutional convention, which will have more time, opportunity and presumably also the needed expertise to discharge it.”

This early, a clash between the two great houses of Congress, the Senate and the House of Representatives appears imminent. Both houses seem to disagree as to what is the interpretation of the provisions of Section 1 and 3 of Article XVII of the Constitution when it states “ The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members”xxx.

While the proponents of Cha-Cha thru Con-Ass are arguing that it should be Congress as a whole which will be the basis of the required number, a three-fourths vote of all Members of Congress, some Senators are arguing that it should not be the case, since in the Senate they only number twenty- four (24), thus they in no way can outnumber the other House dominated by administration party members.

If this issue will continue to be unsettled and the proponents of Charter Change would press hard their last ditch effort to effectuate Charter amendments, I expect the parties to call on the court of last resort, our last bulwark of democracy, our Supreme Court to settle this legal issue.

While a survey shows that most Filipinos still do not favor Cha - Cha, the move to amend our Constitution still is rolling and now has even changed battlefield, Congress. From the tune of People’s Initiative, things are heading towards an attempt by the Cha-cha proponents towards Constitutional Assembly.

May the citizenry not wait long enough to find the logical answers and resolutions to these controversial issues.

Linkback: https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=85116.0