Timing

That "Great Debate" on charter change which President GMA called for in her State of the Nation Address is being muddled by charges that cha-cha is actually part of a grand strategy whose principal elements are the Graceful Exit Option and the Diversionary Tactic.

There is no real demonstrable need for charter change at this time, critics claim. Cha-cha was only roused from long hibernation because it happened to be needed to extricate GMA from her own political Gordian Knot. Since none of her resident self-proclaimed eggheads, much less her disorganized, dissembling and distracted "communications group," has been able to help her untie that knot, cha-cha was called upon to simply cut through it a la Alexander the Great.

The opposition in the House is trying very hard to focus national attention on the impeachment charges, assuring one and all that they possess at least two large rooms with damning evidence from floor to ceiling. Lead prosecutor Rep. Ronnie Zamora promised the foreign press the other day that GMA would "suffer" as the process unfolds.

At least 32 congressmen have signed a resolution against cha-cha and they claim there will be many more signing on soon. The Senate, of course, save three pro-cha-cha diehards, says "absolutely not." If surveys are to be believed, most Filipinos do not believe that changes in the Constitution are necessary.

I’m not sure that any of this contrary opinion represents thoughtful evaluation of the criticality of charter changes. It seems the nay-sayers are driven mostly by the stubborn belief that top priority must be given now to determining the truth or validity of all the charges against Gloria, principally the allegations that she stole the last elections in connivance with a servile and corrupt Commission on Elections official, that she and some members of her family personally benefited from illegal jueteng and that she, her husband, son and brother-in-law have stashed away masses of unexplained wealth.

The argument is that whether or not our Constitution needs amending does not detract one whit from the illegality of her alleged acts, if proven. The fact is that GMA’s impeachment is separable from the need to adopt charter changes.

Naturally, the impeachment and cha-cha are related issues, which is why GMA keeps pounding on the theme that defects in the system make it difficult for any politician to emerge without a taint. That seems to be code for admitting that cheating does occur during election exercises, but the system is so rotten that anyone who doesn’t play the mandatory games will be swallowed up by the system and then disgorged like vomit.

Those who are victimized by the flawed system counter that the result has been that money is what fuels the rackets, money that often comes from the national treasury and from organized crimes such as drugs and jueteng. "Control" of the system is essential, and control is cemented by strategically-placed appointees to the Comelec.

Politics, this disenchanted group often points out, is full of hypocrites. Everyone does it when his turn at the feeding trough comes. The only constraint is the Eleventh Commandment. If you’re caught, like when you’re taped in cozy tete-a-tetes with Comelec officials, in conversations dripping with innuendo, double entendre and deliciously vague suggestions, then you’re on your own.

Thus, the Solomonic solution: Convict, or impeach, the guilty but end the rotten system and change the Constitution which makes it possible.

Those who argue against cha-cha, aside from deriding it as a GMA ploy, usually claim that there is nothing wrong with our present Constitution, and that the real problem is the people who implement it. But that applies to most human affairs. There are lascivious priests and ministers, pedophile teachers and, don’t we know it, crooked cops. But I haven’t heard anyone arguing for the abolition of the priesthood or the bible ministry, the teaching profession or police. In the end, we are the people and we are largely responsible for putting other people in positions of power and responsibility.

As for those who remain unconvinced that the present Constitutional system does not work, I simply paraphrase Hamlet’s queries: Do you not have eyes? Do you not have ears? Or have we somehow missed the remarkable progress happening in neighboring countries while we continue to agonize about how intractable our poverty problem is?

The analysis of some experts, which is naturally contradicted by other experts, is that there are several fundamental defects in our system, not the least of which is an obstructive, unresponsive, inflexible and intrusive political process. Does charter change offer way out of this dungeon? Perhaps, but one of the opportunities presented by the "great debate" on charter change is that all those who think that they have better ideas should now test these proposals in the crucible of public discourse.

There are those who insist that the l987 Constitution is one of the most progressive in the whole world. In terms of theoretical entitlements, and as statements of the indubitable benefits of a thriving and vibrant democracy, I do not disagree. But after almost 20 years of experience with this charter, I wonder if people can say that our lives have really improved.

This is not to say that an amended charter should necessarily omit the goodies enunciated in the 1987 charter. I would, however, not leave entirely to our legislators the onus of deciding when to enact the legislation needed to give substance to Constitutional aspirations. Otherwise, like the stern injunction against political dynasties, it’ll never happen. A recital of virtuous ends never means we have realized them.

I think that’s why, even as she called for a parliamentary, federal system of government and expressed specific preference for a constituent assembly, GMA also pulled the trigger on the starting gun for a great debate. And as Vice President Noli de Castro noted, the people may really need to be educated on what charter change is all about. That’s all the people, mind you, not just the masa.

When all is said and done, charter change is really more important than the political fortunes of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Wherever her impeachment is bound to go, the great debate must go on. The timing may not be particularly auspicious but, hey, things happen – the good, the bad and the ugly – when we least expect it.