Fait accompli

The supposed ratification of the 1973 Philippine Constitution was a product of chicanery. A brilliant mind concocted an elaborate (but to me deceitful) plan against Filipinos. Such plan was set in motion thru a series of seemingly-needed legislative enactments namely Resolution of Both Houses (RBH) No. 2, as amended by RBH No. 4, which was adopted by Congress on March 16, 1967, and June 17, 1969, respectively, and Republic Act No. 6132, otherwise known as the 1971 Constitutional Convention Act which was approved on August 24, 1970. To be sure the enumeration of these congressional measures didn’t attract the attention of our countrymen then as my citing them here now may more appear insignificant than relevant until you note the dates of their passage. These took place during the second term of President Ferdinand Edralin Marcos after which he was supposed to step down.

Marcos was obsessed with staying in power. Da Apo was elected president in 1965 for a term of four years. I, a 15-year-old non-voter, campaigned for him. He was re-elected for his last term in 1969. I remember as a 19-year-old non-voter, heading a youth group going around the province helping his re-election. Under the 1935 Constitution, he had to step down from office after serving four years from his re-election. Only by changing the Constitution could he remain in power. So, the 1971 constitutional convention was his perfect stage.

As president, Marcos was popular. His control of the government was nigh absolute as only an emasculated Liberal Party could offer critique. Even the eloquence of such party opposition stalwarts as Jovito Salonga, Gerardo Roxas and Sergio Osmeña Jr., was silenced in the Plaza Miranda bombings of August 21, 1971 (Benigno Aquino Jr., arrived at the shambled scene minutes after the bombs exploded). Still the president wasn’t 100% sure the constitutional convention, convened on June 1, 1971, would revise the charter and allow his stay in power.

Came Proclamation No. 1081, part of the grand scheme. Signed on September 21, 1972 but announced on September 23, 1972, it placed the country under martial law. With martial law powers, Marcos padlocked Congress and ordered the arrest of opposition leaders, the left, and thousands others. But, he allowed the constitutional convention to proceed.

I could feel the kind of fearful impact of martial law thru its effect on the assembly as it revised our Constitution. While the convention already spent more than a year in deliberation, with no completed draft to show, yet for reasons known only to the delegates, it took only practically two months for them to finish their work.

Plebiscite had to follow. Do we recall that Marcos issued Presidential Decree No. 86, on December 30, 1972, establishing Citizens Assemblies (Barangays) in each barrio, district, or barangay to encourage citizen participation in government and provide a platform for expressing views on national issues? It was in this forum that the draft revised Constitution was sent for the people’s approval.

The formalities of a plebiscite are those mandated by election laws. Generally speaking, for the purpose of plebiscite, only 21-year-old electors could participate, there were ballots to fill up secretly in the presence of watchers and results were to be printed and signed by the election board. Because none of these were to be used in conducting the plebiscite, petitions, called the Plebiscite Cases, were raised to the Supreme Court.

It came to pass that while the Supreme Court was still hearing arguments on the unconstitutionality of the plebiscite, Marcos issued another proclamation announcing that Filipinos overwhelmingly ratified the Constitution. The Supreme Court could only declare that it was fait accompli. The 1973 Constitution, which provided the incumbent president the right to continue exercising his powers under the 1935 Constitution and the powers vested in the president and the prime minister under the new Constitution, was declared ratified.

Now this off-tangent question: There might be attendant legal flaws in the arrest of former president Rodrigo Duterte, but is that issue now a fait accompli?