Change in changing times

“Huwag pumirma!” (Do not sign!) That was the warning sent by Bishop Broderick Pabillo, D.D., Vicar Apostolic of Taytay, Palawan, on Jan. 11, calling on Catholics and the public not to sign a circulating petition to amend the 1987 Constitution. Bishop Pabillo claimed there have also been cases where money is offered to those who will sign the petition, at the barangay or other local government level. “In a statement shared by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), Bishop Pabillo warned that the petition seeks to amend the constitution by presenting itself as a people’s initiative but is, in reality, driven by politicians” (inquirer.net, Jan. 11, 2024).

The People’s Initiative for Reform Modernization and Action (PIRMA), a pro-charter change group whose ad was released on Jan. 9, 2024 (tagline “EDSA-Pwera” or “No to EDSA People Power Revolution), is also collecting more than 8 million signatures, equivalent to 12% of the country’s registered voting population, needed to legitimize its Cha-cha petition (Ibid.).

Bishop Severo Caermare echoed Bishop Pabillo (in his “Sulat Pamahayag” on Jan. 14, on the “ongoing signature gathering wherein money was offered to the voters”), joined by his hundred priests of the Diocese of Dipolog, said that “a people’s initiative not coming from the people and without prior consultation may only end up favoring a few interests” (Rappler.com, Jan. 15).

Bishop Jose Colin Bagaforo of Kidapawan, president of the papal charity Caritas Philippines, has said that “any attempt to alter the constitution, especially when shrouded in secrecy and lacking genuine public participation, raises serious concerns about its true motives. Instead of wasting time and resources on amending the constitution, the government should prioritize measures to eradicate corruption (Union of Catholic Asian News, ucanews.com, Jan. 18).

The National Council of Churches in the Philippines (NCCP), an ecumenical fellowship of non-Roman Catholic Christian denominations, has reiterated that “the present constitution is capable of protecting our natural patrimony and economy against foreign plunder and dominance. Tinkering with the charter can open the floodgates to changing the term limits of government officials,” the NCCP warned in a statement (Ibid.).

Too quickly from the open exhortations of the Churches against charter change came the unexpected announcement of Senate President Juan Miguel Zubiri that he met with President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. and the president’s cousin, House Speaker

Martin Romualdez, regarding the ongoing “People’s Initiative” to change the charter. Zubiri said the instruction they got from Marcos was for the Senate to take the lead in reviewing the economic provisions of the Constitution which would be adopted by the House later on. (Rappler.com, Jan. 15).

“The President agreed with us that the (PIRMA) proposal was too divisive, and asked the Senate to instead take the lead in reviewing the economic provisions of the Constitution. In this way, we can preserve our bicameral nature of legislation,” Zubiri said. This is a completely different tune for Zubiri as he was, in the past, totally against Charter change (Cha-cha) even for economic provisions, Rappler said (Ibid.).

Zubiri immediately filed Resolution of Both Houses No. 6, “proposing amendments to certain economic provisions of the 1987 Constitution.” He co-authored this with Senators Sonny Angara and Loren Legarda. The resolution only includes amendments in the operation of public utilities and education services. “[The] nation’s economic policy must be reframed under the demands of this increasingly globalized age, while still protecting the general policy of Filipino-first that guides the economic provisions of the Constitution,” the resolution read. “Our children deserve to have access to the best educational institutions, both Filipino and foreign, to ensure that they receive the best training to become

globally competitive citizens in the modern world,” it added.

The Senate review on Cha-cha will be in the context of the Public Service Act (PSA), which was amended to allow foreign ownership in certain public services like airports, railways, expressways, and telecommunications. “The Senate commits that it will work with the House of Representatives to remove all doubts on the constitutionality of the law by ensuring that the liberalized policies contained in the PSA can be implemented and relied on by investors as an enduring policy. It is only in this respect that the Senate can agree to modify the Constitution,” Zubiri said (Ibid.).

Zubiri’s resolution needs 18 votes from senators. The review will be led by Angara who chairs the finance committee. The Senate president tried to reassure those wary of Cha-cha that term limits will not be part of the amendments. But critics worry that once Congress green lights the process, it will be all too easy to go beyond economic amendments and sneak in provisions that will allow politicians to stay longer in power (Ibid.).

Yes, perhaps the most feared change is the term limits provision in any charter change. The main proponent of Charter change at the House of Representatives conceded from the start that there was no guarantee that a constitutional convention (Con-con), once formed, would stick to only tweaking economic provisions of the 1987 Constitution. House committee on constitutional amendments chair and Cagayan de Oro Rep. Rufus Rodriguez acknowledged that there was a “big possibility” that political provisions, including those pertaining to term limits of elected officials, as cited during his panel hearing, could be discussed by the then-proposed “hybrid Con-con” of elected and appointed officials from 253 congressional districts (Philippine Daily Inquirer, Feb. 24, 2023).

There were consistently expected (but failed) attempts in every administration after that of Corazon Aquino’s, to change the 1987 Constitution — which had changed the 1973 Constitution that allowed dictator Ferdinand Marcos an “unlimited” term of office and created a “rubber stamp” legislature in the Batasang Pambansa, according to Gabriela Partylist Representative Arlene Brosas (inquirer.net, March 2, 2023).

The first attempt to amend the 1987 Constitution was under President Fidel Ramos, proposing changes in the constitution included a shift to a parliamentary system and the lifting of term limits of public officials. Critics with different sectors of society, argued that the proposed constitutional the commission proposed changes would benefit revisions to the 1987 constitution the incumbent, Ramos. The first relating to a shift to a unicameral PIRMA, which sought to amend parliamentary form of government; the Constitution through a signature economic liberalization; campaign or People’s Initiative further decentralization of the was in Ramos’ time. The National Government, and more Supreme Court dismissed the empowerment of local governments petition on the grounds that the through a transition to a People’s Initiative mode did not parliamentary-federal government have enough enabling laws for system (pcij.org, May 29, 2006). the proposed revisions or amendments A signature campaign (like in the 1987 constitution. PIRMA) called “Sigaw ng Bayan” On Sept. 21, 1997, a church-organized was launched to clinch the charter protest rally brought in an change proposals, but religious, estimated half a million people to business, and political groups, and Rizal Park. coalitions such as One Voice, opposed

And during the presidency of the proposed amendments, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo were the citing untimeliness and contending most attempts made to change the that the incumbent President 1987 Constitution. Arroyo issued and her allies would directly benefit Executive Order No. 453 in August from the proposed changes by 2005 to create the Consultative extending the President’s term of Commission headed by Dr. José office (BBC, July 27, 2009). Abueva. After holding consultations It is a case of déjà vu today.

It is like a recurrent bad dream — this insistence of our leaders on charter change. The insistence so crassly insinuates self-interest that disregards the common good, and naked greed for perpetuation in power and the multiplication of wealth. Why cannot they even wait for better economic times for this poor, developing country that has been reeling from world recession after the deadly COVID-19 pandemic that still maliciously lingers to draw out more blood from its hapless victims? We pray for leaders with right consciences and clean hands.

God help us through these changes in these changing times.