House sends RBH 7 to Senate

AFTER approving on third and final reading Resolution of Both Houses (RBH) 7, the House of Representatives on Wednesday night ordered that the resolution be immediately transmitted to the Senate.

RBH 7, which contains amendments to certain economic provisions of the Constitution, was passed during plenary session with 288 lawmakers voting yes, eight voting no and two abstaining.

Isabela 6th District Rep. Faustino “Inno” Dy 5th had moved for the transmittal to the Senate of RBH 7 along with House Bill 9710.

House Bill 9710 seeks to revoke the legislative franchise of Sonshine Media Network International (SMNI). It hurdled third and final reading with 284 lawmakers voting for it, four against and four abstaining.

House Deputy Majority Leader Jude Acidre said in a press conference on Thursday that “as far as the House is concerned, we’ve already fulfilled our mandate.”

“We have passed the resolution and we have already forwarded it to the Senate. Now, we’re looking at our friends in the upper house of what they will do because as they insist, Congress is a bicameral body and the actions of the House has to be reciprocated by the Senate and we have full trust considering that RBH 6 is authored by the Senate President, by the Senate President Pro Tempore, ... and the chairman of the subcommittee,” the Tingog party-list congressman said.

He was referring to Senate President Juan Miguel “Migz” Zubiri, and Senators Lorna Regina “Loren” Legarda and Juan Edgardo “Sonny” Angara.

Angara led deliberations on RBH 6, the Senate’s own version of RBH 7.

Both resolutions cover Article XII (Section 11), Article XIV (paragraph 2 of Section 4), and Article XVI (paragraph 2 of Section 11).

They seek to add the words “unless otherwise provided by law” to the provisions, and the word “basic” before the words “educational institutions” in the first sentence of paragraph 2, Section 4 of Article XIV.

Acidre said Speaker Ferdinand Martin Romualdez wants to give the Senate as much time as it needs to tackle the proposed amendments.

“However, we have to understand ... there is a limited timeframe to do this. As many of us actually know, the elections are coming, and we already cited that the most favorable time is for this to be passed before Congress adjourns sine die,” he said.

Congress will adjourn sine die in May.

“Those are not arbitrary deadlines that the House got from thin air ... these deadlines are self-apparent. They are there. We will have elections in 2025. We will file our certificates of candidacy in October this year,” Acidre said.

In a press briefing before the plenary session on Wednesday, House Deputy Speaker David “Jayjay” Suarez said “the most prudent action to be taken” is to take advantage of the break to work out with the Senate a “unified position moving forward” regarding RBH 7.

The Senate started deliberations on RBH 6 earlier this year.

Commission on Elections (Comelec) Chairman George Erwin Garcia said that if RBH 7 is submitted directly to the poll body, it would go through a thorough study to determine if it is in accordance with the legal process in amending the Constitution.

Garcia said on Thursday everything is still speculative because the Comelec has not received any word from the House regarding RBH 7.

“It is ministerial on the part of the Comelec to accept it but it would be thoroughly studied because it has no precedent ... This is the first time, if ever, that a resolution pertaining to the amendment of the Constitution is submitted to the Comelec,” he said.

Garcia also needs to be clarified if the submission of RBH 7 to the commission is the right process.

It appears, he said, that a counterpart resolution from the Senate needs to be submitted to the Comelec, to resolve the question whether or not the House can amend the Constitution by itself.

“Is Congress (the Senate and the House) voting jointly or separately,” he said. “But again, all of these are still premature. All of us can speculate. We don’t know. RBH 7 might not be filed with the commission.”

Garcia said that it is also possible only RBH 7 will be filed with the Comelec to create a “justiciable” reason for the Supreme Court to act on the issue of Charter change.

“There is what we call a justiciable controversy. What is it? It is an issue that can be elevated to the Supreme Court because there is a government agency that issued a decision about it,” he said.

“In my opinion, if [RBH 7] is received by the Comelec and it acted on it that can be used as basis [in elevating the issue] to the Supreme Court,” Garcia said.

The Senate has yet to act on RBH 6.

House Majority Leader Manuel Jose Dalipe floated the idea of forwarding RBH 7 directly to the Comelec once it is approved by the House. “If we have three-fourths vote on RBH 7, and everything has been complied with in accordance with the Constitution, then my suggestion is we forward it to the Commission on Elections,” Dalipe said.

He said both chambers of Congress would have to submit their respective Charter change proposals to the Comelec.

“That is my interpretation. The House and the Senate will forward it to the Comelec, because ultimately it will be the Comelec who will finally decide if it is up to be presented to our voters in a plebiscite,” Dalipe said.

Angara strongly opposed the House plan to submit RBH 7 directly to the Comelec, saying the Senate and the House operate under a bicameral system.