PDSP pushes for con-con next year

A pro-administration group proposed yesterday the holding of a constitutional convention (con-con), describing it as the best option and the most acceptable means of amending the Constitution.

The Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (PDSP) said the more viable option for the administration is to call for a constitutional convention whose delegates would be elected during the midterm polls next year.

"Since the Supreme Court has killed people’s initiative, Charter change proponents should shift to a constitutional convention, which is the best way to introduce changes to the Constitution because it is not as divisive as people’s initiative," said Fr. Jose Romeo Intengan, PDSP education commission head.

Intengan explained con-con will not be as divisive as a people’s initiative or the constituent assembly being pushed by administration allies at the House of Representatives.

"Charter change is ethically acceptable only if it will promote the aim of a prosperous, just and caring society. The manner of bringing about Cha-cha should be as unifying and non-divisive as possible," he said.

To minimize costs, election for delegates to the con-con should be by congressional district. This should be held simultaneous with the May 2007 senatorial and local elections, PDSP spokesman Jose Ricafrente said.

"The efficacy of a constituent assembly is as ticklish as the

people’s initiative and will surely land in the Supreme Court. It is a wonder then why the less controversial constitutional convention has not been set in place...

"Notwithstanding the enormous expenses and time necessary for the exercise, it is the only way by which genuine political and economic reforms may be embodied in a new Constitution," Ricafrente said.

Ricafrente said converting Congress into an interim parliament is suspect because "this could be an easy way of circumventing the three-term limit of many incumbent legislators."

While there can be no debate that the term of office of the incumbent President and Vice President should be respected, Ricafrente said the proscription on the term limit of congressmen and senators should also be observed.

He said it would be "scandalous that congressmen who can no longer run for reelection in the May 14, 2007 polls may go around the prohibition by making themselves automatically interim parliament members and run as representatives again for parliament, the successor-in-interest of Congress."

On the other hand, Charter change advocates are still hoping for the reversal of the decision against people’s initiative upon the retirement of Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban in December.

"There will be a changing of the guard at the Supreme Court and there will be one vacancy. We hope that a new composition of the SC will consider our motion for reconsideration," Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. told the Manila Overseas Press Club late Friday.

De Venecia noted Panganiban will be retiring in December, which means there will be 14 justices left that will review the historic 8-7 vote that dismissed the people’s initiative petition filed by Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAP) and Sigaw ng Bayan.

Panganiban reportedly cast the swing vote to break the tie among the magistrates that turned down the people’s initiative petition.

Panganiban, along with Associate Justice Reynato Puno made strong dissenting opinions in favor of the people’s initiative in a 1997 SC ruling involving the Commission on Elections (Comelec) and Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago that junked a similar effort made by the group People’s Initiative for Reform, Modernization and Action (PIRMA).

This time, Panganiban decided to junk the petition of ULAP and Sigaw ng Bayan seeking to amend the Constitution through people’s initiative.

Charter change advocates led by De Venecia slammed the decision, claiming the SC focused on facts surrounding the petition instead of the legal issues.

ULAP and Sigaw said they will file a motion for reconsideration, hoping for a reversal of the decision.

De Venecia, on the other hand, declared the ruling signals only the beginning of efforts to amend the Charter.

"We have not given up the fight. We are only beginning to fight. The spirit is not broken. If we still lose the people’s initiative, we still have the constituent assembly, the second mode of amending the

constitution," De Venecia said.

The House leader accused the SC justices of overstepping the court’s mandate when they decided on factual issues in the petition and accused ULAP and Sigaw of "grand deception" in gathering the million signatures to support their petition.

"They (SC) concentrated on the technicalities and not on the merits or demerits of the case," De Venecia said.

He said the SC should have remanded the petition to the Comelec to determine the veracity of gathered signatures. -With Delon Porcalla