If political reform is what Mrs. Arroyo is after, she should focus on the electoral process that has undercut voter confidence, the newspaper said in an editorial on Friday.
"Unfortunately, Ms. Arroyo has come up with a radical distraction: She wants to move from a presidential system to a parliamentary form of government," it said.
Mrs. Arroyo’s rationale for the change is that it would be less dangerous to her interests than impeachment, but her ploy will not eliminate her most critical problem — a large majority of Filipinos, according to polls, want her to resign or be impeached, the major US daily said.
Evidence that Mrs. Arroyo tried to manipulate the results of last year’s presidential election is not overwhelming and fortunately there doesn’t seem to be any momentum for another "people power" uprising, the Post said.
The daily said when "people power" toppled the dictatorship of President Ferdinand Marcos in 1986, it was a cause for celebration.
"But when a second ‘people power‘ revolt in 2001 stripped power from Joseph Estrada, the country’s democratically elected president, the celebrated method lost its luster."
It said popular uprisings rarely curb corruption and only weaken democratic institutions already in place. Presidential stonewalling doesn’t help either.
"Real people power in the Philippines? Make the democratic system work as it should," the Post said.
In her State of the Nation Address last July, Mrs. Arroyo called on Congress to consider rewriting the Constitution and change the country’s form of government from the current US-style presidential system to a parliamentary, federal set-up.
She argued that such a move would fuse the legislative and executive branches of government and help stop gridlock caused by quarrels between the president and the legislature, as well as making the government more efficient and responsive to the public.
However, the Senate may again block the renewed attempt to amend the Constitution — just as it did last year — because most senators disagree with Charter change proponents over when and how to make the amendments.
The Constitution may be amended by a constituent assembly, a constitutional convention or a people’s initiative.
In a constituent assembly, Congress would propose amendments while in a constitutional convention, delegates elected by the people to the panel would introduce amendments.
In a people’s initiative, at least 12 percent of the electorate may propose changes through a petition. All proposed amendments must then be ratified by the people in a plebiscite.
Congress may sit as a constituent assembly if both its chambers each adopt a resolution for the purpose. Last year, the House of Representatives passed such a resolution but a similar measure did not make it through in the Senate.
Past attempts to amend the Charter during the administrations of Fidel Ramos and Estrada were blocked by strong public opposition.
Most Filipinos fear that Charter change proponents might remove limits on elective officials’ terms put in place to prevent a repeat of the Marcos dictatorship as well as abuse of power.
Critics add that a parliamentary system needs strong parties to work properly and that a strong party system is something the Philippines’ personality-driven politics notably lacks.
Former President Fidel Ramos suggested amending the Constitution by a constituent assembly and changing the country’s form of government to minimize political bickering shortly after the political crisis broke.
He said it would also give President Arroyo a "graceful exit" amid opposition-led calls for her resignation over allegations that she cheated in last year’s presidential election.
An impeachment complaint filed by opposition lawmakers accuses Mrs. Arroyo of rigging the May 2004 election, and of corruption, bribery and other crimes.
Key evidence includes wiretapped conversations between Mrs. Arroyo and an election official, believed to be former Virgilio Garcillano, allegedly discussing ways to ensure her victory by a million votes.