In its ruling, the SC cited the absence of an enabling law to conduct a people’s initiative to change the Charter, saying the petition called for a wholesale revision of the Charter, not just amendments. Some members of the tribunal also called the petition insufficient in form and substance, with some even going so far as to question the manner by which the 6.3 million signatures were verified. It would be best for Joe de V that Chacha is done the right way, and the process should not be rushed. It should be done carefully and deliberately, even if it takes longer than usual. Otherwise, it will become an expensive exercise that could just boomerang in the end. As it is, Joe de V should be prepared to do a real Chacha – one step backward, two steps forward – like what Confucius said.
What happened with the people’s initiative should serve as a lesson to everyone that we can’t really do things using the fast-track method, simply going by the plain "pwede na" mentality that a lot of Pinoys are often guilty of. Sigaw ng Bayan and the Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAP) should have learned from a similar 1997 SC ruling that said a sufficient and an enabling law is needed to sustain a people’s initiative in amending the Constitution. One cannot simply rush headlong into something as important as Charter change. The way things are, some opponents of Charter change have taken to snidely remarking that the Chacha proponents were doing it "suntok sa buwan," failing to consider solid arguments against their case. It’s unfortunate that even Congressman Prospero Pichay is afflicted by this "pwede na" mentality, going by his remarks when he disclosed that 194 congressmen – one more than the required 193 – are ready to back his own House Resolution proposing for Charter change through a constituent assembly. Pichay at the onset had said he will not allow his version to be merged with that of Congressman Constantino Jaraula’s two-part version which calls for Charter change by first, convening Congress into a constituent assembly to approve constitutional amendments. Once done, this will be followed by actual proposed amendments lifting economic restrictions and abolishing the present presidential-bicameral system with that of a parliamentary-unicameral system. The first part of Jaraula’s version had been approved by the plenary and sent to the Senate. But Congressman Pichay’s contention that his version would be more successful in pushing for con-ass because they have the numbers might just prove to be an exercise in futility later on if done without the cooperation of the Senate. To push through with the con-ass knowing that it would be bitterly debated, questioned and opposed by Senators and then eventually elevated to the Supreme Court might prove to be another divisive and costly exercise once again. As it is, there are already indications of internal strife within Congress with JDV’s allies suspicious of Pichay’s motives in crafting his own House version when the resolution of Jaraula – identified with the camp of Speaker de Venecia – has already been endorsed by the committee on constitutional amendments.
The finger pointing between Cabinet members on the defeat of the petition is not helping any either, and will only underscore the growing perception that the people’s initiative was a useless and expensive exercise. The way things are, Defense Secretary Nonong Cruz was probably right. He is a brilliant lawyer, having served as GMA’s chief legal counsel, and I assume he knows his law. Nonong Cruz was right in saying that the people’s initiative was "constitutionally infirm." Unfortunately, many misconstrued his speaking out as going against GMA. He probably had good intentions by giving his legal interpretation on the issue, but now some people are trying to remove him. As he pointed out, the abolition of the two Houses of Congress and the watering down of the president’s powers cannot be considered as just simple amendments.
Many businessmen believe the economy should be the priority, and Charter change is necessary if we want this country to become economically progressive and give it a fighting chance in a world that has become global. Moody’s recent upgrade of the country’s credit rating to stable, and the peso’s continued rise when it hit P49.70 to the dollar registering the strongest performance since 2002, seem to show good economic indicators. GMA has already made a mark in history, and she should make sure that intrigues and further divisiveness over the ChaCha are dealt with accordingly. Pushing through con-ass without Senate cooperation would only prolong the process of changing the Constitution.
Whether done through con-ass or con-con, as some groups are advocating, Charter change should be done the right way and through a process that will not be questioned for its transparency and legality. If ChaCha proponents want to chart the course of this country, it has to be done legally and constitutionally. In the end, rushing things and fast tracking the process could only open the doors for more divisiveness and make it more costly, financially and otherwise. Efforts to change the Charter should be on course, even if it takes longer. We cannot afford another costly mistake like the failed people’s initiative. Those who want to change the course of the Charter would do well to remember what popular Minnesota governor Brad Henry said: "In charting our course to the future, we should be mindful of our path from the past."