Marcos urged to define stance on charter change

MANILA, Philippines — Political science professors from the University of the Philippines Diliman urged President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. on Thursday to clarify his stance on changing the Constitution.

During a hearing of the House committee on constitutional amendments, political science professors from the UP Diliman said that all proposed constitutional revisions after the term of former President Ferdinand Marcos Sr. have been “executive-driven,” making it high time for Marcos Jr. to speak on the long-debated issue. 

“It is essential that the current executive leadership define where it stands on constitutional revision and the process it envisions as well as identify the responsible authorities who will oversee it,” the statement of the UP Department of Political Science read. 

Speaking on behalf of the department, political science professor Aries Arugay said: “On the mode of whether to amend or revise the Constitution, the question my department asks: who is in charge?”

Unlike his predecessor, Marcos Jr. has yet to state his views on charter change during his term as president. However, Marcos Jr. said in a radio interview in January 2022 that it would be difficult to change the Constitution due to the public’s perception that lawmakers merely want to extend their stay in office.

The political science department also disagreed with a claim in a joint resolution by Rep. Aurelio "Dong" Gonzales Jr. (3rd District) last year that Marcos Jr.’s overwhelming majority win translated to a “greenlight from the citizenry to proceed with moves to change the Constitution.” 

“For one, amending the constitution was not a significant part of President Marcos Jr.’s election campaign platform or legislative agenda,” the statement read. “We cannot proceed with Charter Change without the genuine buy-in of an informed public, let alone its absence in the presidential legislative agenda.”

Invited to speak at a House hearing on charter change for the first time since 2020, the political science experts also said that revising the Constitution should not “take time and resources away from other legislative priorities" from lawmakers.

“We also humbly remind our honorable decision makers that constitutional change is not the 'silver bullet' or the holy elixir to cure our country’s problems. It is not a panacea to remedy our socio-economic ills or the only means to accomplish our national desires and aspirations,” the political science professors said. 

Among the proposed political revisions to the Constitution include revised term limits for the president and vice president, where each is given a five-year term upon election with an option to be re-elected.

This would potentially give the next president at least 10 years to stay in office.

The House resumed its deliberations on nine pending proposals to amend the 1987 Constitution earlier, which include enacting a constitutional convention and amending the constitution's provision on foreign ownership.