DILG role in people’s initiative questioned

Crossing party lines, 21 senators questioned yesterday the role of the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) in the people’s initiative being pushed by President Arroyo’s allies in calling for amendments to the 1987 Constitution.

Only senators Edgardo Angara and Lito Lapid declined to sign the resolution, which was adopted last night.

It expresses the view that the "signature campaign to introduce changes to the Constitution through barangay assemblies initiated by the DILG is illegal."

It said the DILG erred in issuing a directive, Memorandum Circular 2006-05, enjoining barangay heads to conduct barangay assemblies on March 25, 2006 to tackle issues on health, agriculture, education and current issues affecting the country.

Senators argued that the people’s initiative should come directly from the people without influence from the government or any other party.

They pointed out there is no existing enabling law for a people’s initiative for Charter change, which was the basis of a 1997 Supreme Court ruling on the issue.

Citing the court ruling, the senators said the Commission on Elections (Comelec) is "permanently enjoined from entertaining or taking cognizance of any petition for initiative on amendments on the Constitution until a sufficient law shall have been validly enacted to provide the implementation of the system."

They added that only minor revisions to the Constitution may be made via a people’s initiative.

They earlier contended that changing the country’s form of government — which President Arroyo is pushing — can only be made either via a constituent assembly, a method preferred by the House of Representatives, or a constitutional convention, preferred by the Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Francis Pangilinan said any attempt to change the Charter "beyond our laws" would be vigorously opposed by senators.

Pangilinan noted that a shift to parliamentary government as proposed in the barangay assemblies, "rewrites all" of Articles 6 and 7 of the Constitution, which is considered a major revision.

"We are open to Charter change, we are even open to a shift in the form of government, but only in a manner that is consistent with the Constitution, and never in violation of it," Pangilinan said.

Senators Miriam Defensor-Santiago and Ramon Magsaysay, who are both on official sick leave, signed by mail the resolution spearheaded by Senate President Franklin Drilon.

In an e-mail message to Drilon, Magsaysay asked that he be allowed to sign as co-author of the resolution. "I am in the United States for medical reasons and have to invoke the provisions of the E-Commerce law to sign this through my digital signature."

Magsaysay, in agreeing with the move, was optimistic that the people would finally "realize the great farce that is being presented to them which will make us into a ‘banana republic’ in the eyes of the international community.

"I am on medical leave because of heart disease, but I have grown even more heartsick (reading) news that certain administration officials will try to convince the Supreme Court to overrule the decision in the 1997 cha-cha people’s initiative called Defensor Santiago vs Comelec," Santiago said in a statement.

Acting on a complaint filed by Santiago against the Comelec, the Supreme Court on June 10, 1997, ruled that Republic Act 6735, the law regulating people’s initiative, "was inadequate to cover the system of initiative on amendments to the Constitution, and (to have) failed to provide sufficient standard for subordinate legislation."

Santiago contested a people’s initiative aimed at lifting the constitutional one-term limit on the president and allowing then President Fidel Ramos to seek a second term.

The one-term limit was put in place when the Constitution was rewritten in 1986 to avoid a repeat of the Marcos dictatorship.

Arroyo allies in the House are banking on a possible Supreme Court reversal.

House Majority Leader Prospero Nograles told reporters that the High Tribunal’s decisions "sometimes adjust to the changing of the times. Things have changed by this time."

Santiago, a former Quezon City trial court judge, said a reversal is unlikely.

"The doctrine involved says in Latin: stare decisis et non quieta movere. It means that justices should adhere to precedence, and not unsettle things that are already established," Santiago said in her statement.

"The doctrine called stare decisis, for short, means that rules or principles of law on which a court rested a previous decision are authoritative on all future cases in which the facts are substantially the same," she explained further.

The Supreme Court rarely reverses its own decisions.

The political opposition suspects the Arroyo administration of orchestrating the people’s initiative being pushed by its allies.

If successful, the people’s initiative will skirt the impasse between the Senate and the administration-dominated House on the move to amend the Constitution.

Constitutional amendments may be directly proposed by the citizenry through a people’s initiative if they muster backing from at least 12 percent of the electorate.

The Senate and the House are at odds over how to amend the Constitution.

Senators contend that the House’s preferred method, via a constituent assembly, may be seen as self-serving because lawmakers would make up a majority of the body.

They prefer amendments through a constitutional convention, made up of elected delegates.

Past attempts to amend the Constitution failed mainly due to fears that elected officials’ term limits would be lifted.

Administration officials deny manipulating the people’s initiative drive.

Mrs. Arroyo wants to change the current US-style presidential form of government to a federal parliamentary system, saying it will speed up passage of legislation needed for economic development.

A federal system has also gained favor among provincial governments who have long been dissatisfied over the dominance of "Imperial Manila."

Government economists also say that the Constitution is not attuned to the market-based economy and gives too much power to the judiciary which can effectively scuttle the government’s economic policies.

Critics argue 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.

Elected officials switch parties with ease, making parliamentary governments vulnerable to being toppled anytime. — With Delon Porcalla