Law needed to implement people’s initiative – SC

ILOILO City – Congress needs to pass a l aw to i mplement t he people’s initiative in amending the 1987 Consti t ution, t he Supreme Court held.

In the case of Santiago versus Comelec, the Supreme Court said that without an implementing or enabling law, people’s initiative cannot prosper.

“People’s initiative must be exercised by law. That means the law should provide for the exercise of this right, under Section 2 second paragraph of the 1987 Constitution,” the tribunal said.

And even if a law provides for implementing the people’s i nitiative, the minimum constitutional requirements must still be complied with.

Under the Constitution, amendment via the people’s initiative requires that the measure must be supported by at least 12 percent of all registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three percent of the registered voters.

Otherwise, the tribunal said the petition would not prosper.

In the case of Lambino versus Comelec, the tribunal also stated that there are three modes of amending the Constitution under Article XVII.

The first mode is through Congress, acting as a constituent assembly, upon a three-fourths vote of all its members.

The second mode is through a constitutional convention created under a law passed by Congress, and the third mode is through a people’s initiative.

However, no amendment under the people’s initiative mode may be allowed within f ive years following the ratification of the Constitution.

People’s initiative means the method is limited to amendments only; it cannot revise the Constitution.

However, the high court said the people’s right to directly propose amendments to the Constitution cannot be exercised if Congress does not provide for i ts implementation.

It also said that Republic Act 6735, or The Initiative and Referendum Act, failed to give “special attention” to the system of initiative on amendments to the Constitution.

In all of its 21 sections, RA 6735 mentions only the word Constitution, defines it, and enumerates three initiative systems and the required number of voters who shall sign it.

The tribunal said such was an obvious “downgrading” of the more important system of initiative.

“RA 6735 thus delivered a humiliating blow to the system of initiative on amendments to the Constitution by merely paying it a reluctant lip service,” the Supreme Court pointed out.

Under the above l aw, the tribunal clarified that Comelec cannot promulgate rules and regulations to implement the exercise of the right of the people to directly propose amendments to the Constitution through the system of initiative./