Senator Francis Escudero on Thursday warned his colleagues to not proceed with hearings on Resolution of Both Houses (RBH) No. 6, which aims to amend the economic provisions of the 1987 Constitution,without a clear set of guidelines that are contained in the Rules of the Senate.
RBH-6 seeks to amend the three “restrictive” provisions of the country’s Charter on public utilities, advertising, and education.
Escudero noted that the Rules of the Senate do not have a specific section on procedures on constitutional amendments, unlike the House of Representatives, which are categorically stated in Sections 143 and 144 under its Rule XXI.
“I raise this because we do not have a counterpart or similar rule.
And right now, as things stand, the House of Representatives it seems has a rule on how to adopt proposals or reject proposals to amend the Constitution while the Senate does not,” he said.
Section 143 of House Rule XXI states that “Congress, upon a vote of three fourths (3/4) of all its Members, may propose amendment(s) to or revision of the Constitution.”
On the other hand, Section 144 prescribes that proposals “to amend or revise the Constitution shall be by resolution, which may be filed at any time by any Member. The adoption of resolutions proposing amendments to or revision of the Constitution shall follow the procedure for the enactment of bills.”
Escudero then urged the Senate leadership to revisit the Rules of theSenate to craft similar provisions before pushing through with another hearing on RBH 6.
However, Senate President Juan Miguel Zubiri has yet to comment on the issue at press time.
So far, the Senate subcommitee on constitutional amendments and revision of codes chaired by Senator Sonny Angara has conducted three hearings on RBH-6, with the next hearing set on March 5.
But Escudero said the Senate must also resolve the “prejudicialquestion” raised by Senator Risa Hontiveros in the sub-committee’s previous hearing, pertaining to doing a constituent assembly by separate sessions of the House and the Senate or through a joint session by both houses.
“If, for example, we follow or take the position that there has to be a joint session, that separate sessions are not allowed, then clearly, we are wasting our time… For me, this matter has to be settled before we proceed with further hearings, especially the hearing on March 5,” he explained.
Escudero also appealed to the Senate Committee on Rules to study this matter and “decide this with dispatch.”
He said the rules of the Senate and the House should not be different “to thwart any fights or debates.”