Whether People’s Initiative, Constituent Assembly or Constitutional Convention, each may present its own set of challenges
After previous unsuccessful attempts to amend the 1987 Constitution in previous administrations, the House of Representatives is once again taking serious steps at Charter change through People’s Initiative, one of the three modes of Charter change under the present Constitution.
The 2006 petition for People’s Initiative led by a brilliant lawyer Raul Lambino and perceived to be supported by then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo did not succeed.
Likewise, an earlier attempt in the late 1990s, by a group called Pirma that was perceived to be a brainchild of supporters of Fidel V. Ramos also failed.
In the cases of Lambino vs. Comelec and Santiago vs. Comelec, the Supreme Court imposed stringent requirements on the use of the initative mode to amend the Constitution.
This latest attempt at Charter change must comply with those requirements.
For example in Lambino, the Supreme Court pointed to the fatal defect that the signatories to the petition actually did not know what they were saying.
The Court observed: “There is not a single word, phrase, or sentence of text of the Lambino Group’s proposed changes in the signature sheet. Neither does the signature sheet state that the text of the proposed changes is attached to it. xxx
“The signature sheet does not show to the people the draft of the proposed changes before they are asked to sign.
“A signer who did not read the measure attached to a referendum petition cannot question his signature on the ground that he did not understand the nature of the act.”
The inescapable conclusion was that the Lambino Group failed to show to the 6.3 million signatories the full text of the proposed changes.
In other words, there is no clear showing that the petition was backed by 6,327,952 individuals, amounting to a minimum of 12 percent of the total registered voters; that each legislative district was represented by a minimum of three percent of its registered voters.
Additionally, no adequate and clear proof was presented to show that the signatures of the 6.3 million individuals had been verified by COMELEC election registrars.
Earlier, the Supreme Court in Santiago v. Comelec ruled that while the Constitution allows amendments to be directly proposed by the people through initiative, there is no compliant implementing law for the purpose.
As early as now, there is resistance from certain quarters questioning the integrity and propriety of the proposition.
For instance, ACT Teachers Rep. France Castro said the issue was not so much the mode of revising the Constitution.
“Why push for Cha-cha at all when it will not solve the basic problems of Philippine society, not even if it is limited to the economy.”
For his part, Rep. Edcel Lagman asked the following probing questions on the drive: (1) who is the mastermind of this campaign; (2) what are the proposed amendments to be pursued; (3) where do the funds come from; and (4) why buy the voters’ initiative?
More importantly, he disclosed that voters who would sign the petition for People’s Initiative will be given P100 each, “50 percent of which has already been advanced to the municipal mayors and respective coordinators.”
“This movement is apparently nationwide as congressmen belonging to various political parties have been sent the necessary forms,” he said.
Comelec Chair George Garcia, one of the most competent to hold this position, is correct: if it is proven that people were bribed to sign this petition, then it cannot proceed.
Whether People’s Initiative, Constituent Assembly or Constitutional Convention, each may present its own set of challenges.
People’s Initiative in particular entails more expenses than the other two modes.
Logistical problems may be a distinct issue.
The same goes with the verification of signatures by the Comelec which can be thwarted by those who oppose the move.
This is not to say that any attempt at Charter change is bound to fail.
The 1987 Constitution has not the rigidity of Gospel truth.
All told, certain critical factors must be considered for a successful Charter change including timeliness of the initiative, credibility of the proponents, and a well-informed electorate that recognizes the importance of the process.
Website: tonylavina.com Facebook and X: tonylavs