Senator Panfilo Lacson said he would file next week a resolution that would allow the Senate to convene itself into a Constituent Assembly (Con-Ass) as the Senate tackles discussions on the proposed amendment of the 1987 Constitution next Wednesday.
Lacson also said he is contemplating to file a resolution to constitute the Senate, into a Constituent Assembly and wait for the lower house to do the same, if they wish.
Lacson said such resolution is aimed at ensuring a systematic evaluation of the 1987 Constitution and also guarantee that the Senate will not be rendered “irrelevant” when it comes to making changes in the charter.
“Papayag ba yung Senado na papasok kami sa isang joint session with the lower house, knowing na 24 lang kaming mga senador… Ano pang saysay ng Senado? Wala kaming boses dun, ibig sabihin tatango na lang kami, iiling,” [Will the Senate agree to a joint session with the lower house knowing that there are only 24 senators? What purpose will the Senate have? We will have no voice there. It means we will just nod or shake our heads.] he said.
Lacson’s proposal was in direct contrast to the call of the House of Representatives, which wants to form a constituent assembly and eventually vote jointly on amendments to the charter as proposed by Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez.
But Lacson said the Lower House’s plan will only “dilute” the voice of senators.
Lacson said that by convening the Senate as a constituent assembly, people can directly hear each senator’s thoughts on provisions in the charter.
Under Lacson’s resolution, each amendment will also require three-fourths vote of the existing 23-man Senate.
Alvarez had wanted the House and Senate to convene as a constituent assembly to discuss charter change and then form technical working groups thereafter.
Lacson said he hopes the Supreme Court could intervene and issue a “declaratory relief” and decide whether the House and the Senate should vote jointly or separately on charter change.
Asked to comment on Lacson’s plan, Senate President Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III said he has not yet talked to Lacson.
“But from the reports, I gathered that we may have the same idea. We just have to wait then compare what we filed.”
Under the resolution, Lacson said the Senate sitting as a Con-Ass will propose and vote on any amendments to the Constitution by a three-fourths vote.
He added that the Senate will sit down and tackle the proposal with its counterpart, the House of Representatives, to reconcile their disagreeing proposals after voting on the amendments.
He said both chambers should vote separately on any amendments to the 1987 Constitution before presenting it to the people via a plebiscite.
“I hope majority of my colleagues will support the resolution that I intend to file next week,” he said.
Lacson said the Senate decision—whether to adopt it or not—could be used as a basis to bring the issue before the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, Senator Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan said the Senate is ready to tackle charter change after it ended the deliberations on the P3.767-trillion national budget for 2018 and the new government tax program TRAIN.
Pangilinan, chairperson of the Senate committee on constitutional amendments and revision of codes, said the hearing scheduled at 9 a.m. will tackle three bills on amending the Constitution, namely the resolution of Both Houses No. 1 by Minority Leader Sen. Franklin Drilon, Joint Resolution No. 1 by Senator Richard Gordon, and Senate Bill No. 128 by Senator Miguel Zubiri.
Constitution experts, members of the academe, business sector, labor, civil society, and other concerned stakeholders will be invited to help provide inputs in going about the needed constitutional reforms “through a transparent process that guarantees utmost participation by the nation at large,” as Zubiri’s bill expressly states.
“The way to initiate changes or reforms in the Constitution is through a deliberative, thorough, and transparent process. Everyone will have a say here and no one will be left in the dark,” said Pangilinan.
The Partido Liberal president said the hearing will seek to answer the following questions: 1- Is there a need to amend or revise the Constitution? Why or why not. 2. If so, what parts of the Constitution should be amended or revised? Why. 3. Should the amendments or revisions be proposed by a Constitutional Convention or by the Congress itself acting as a constituent assembly? Why?4. If Congress convenes as a constituent assembly to amend or revise the Constitution, should the Senate and the House of Representatives vote jointly or separately? and 5. Can Congress pass a resolution limiting the power of the Constituent Assembly or Constitutional Convention, or are their powers plenary?
Meanwhile, Senator Grace Poe said that given the extent of the proposed changes in the Constitution, having a constitutional convention (concon) is the best and most acceptable mode to take, even if it appears impractical to some.
In a concon, she said revisions to the highest law of the land is tackled with transparency, debated upon by the experts, and shall be decided ultimately by the people and not just those in Congress.
Poe said, however, that should the other senators follow collectively to agree on a constitutional assembly, she would support the position of Lacson that the bicameral congress should vote separately as was actually intended by the framers of the charter.
She said any move for a literal interpretation that would obliterate the relevance of the entire Senate by the 300-member lower House in the voting must be rejected for being contrary to spirit of the 1987 Constitution.