By Carmela Fonbuena, abs-cbnnews.com/Newsbreak
04/13/2009

Contrary to its claim that it is now focusing on the 2010 elections, the Arroyo administration can still convene a constituent assembly in four months, or starting August this year, to revise the Constitution.

This is the analysis of charter change critics who noted recent indications that Congress and the Supreme Court—the two institutions crucial to the process—can promptly act on time-bound issues.

“Despite Palace pronouncements that it favors the holding of elections in 2010, the scenarios for either postponing elections or having Arroyo stay in power are very much alive,” said Renato Reyes Jr., secretary-general of the militant group Bayan. His group launched protest rallies at the gates of the Lower House on Monday.

Some Malacañang allies are saying that with the approaching presidential polls, time is not enough time to push charter change. At the House of Representatives, Speaker Prospero Nograles is also sending mixed signals. (Read story: Nograles’ fate hangs on ‘Cha-cha’)

But Leah Navarro, convener of the reform-seeking Black and White Movement, is not convinced. “These statements are meant to lull us into disinterest. It is cheaper and surer to perpetuate this administration by pushing for constituent assembly than running in election,” she said

Administration lawmakers are pushing to amend the Constitution through a constituent assembly, or the convening of the House and the Senate to propose amendments to the fundamental law.

A three-fourth vote of Congress, or 197 votes, is needed to convene the constituent assembly.

Should the required votes be met, abs-cbnNEWS.com/Newsbreak conservatively estimates that the new Palace strategy will need only four months to succeed.

This time frame includes one session week for the lower House to approve the Villafuerte Resolution, and four months for the Supreme Court to declare—with finality—that joint voting is constitutional.

Joint voting

In a yet-to-be-filed resolution, Camarines Sur Rep. Luis Villafuerte, who heads the other party chaired by President Arroyo, Kampi, is seeking to convene a constituent assembly without the concurrence of the Senate, which is generally opposed to charter change.

The Villafuerte Resolution has been floated as early as last year, but it has apparently taken some time for its proponents to complete the required number of signatures. As of last count, the resolution supposedly has 185 signatures.

House Speaker Nograles earlier said he will file the Villafuerte Resolution himself.

The Villafuerte Resolution is proposing that the two chambers of Congress vote jointly to meet the three-fourth-vote requirement. Joint voting will allow the 238-member House of Representatives to complete the necessary 197 votes without the help of any senator.

Separate voting, meanwhile, will require at least 179 votes from the lower House and at least 18 votes from the Senate.

Only the Supreme Court can interpret how Congress should vote, however. As of April 2009, 13 of the 15 Supreme Court justices are appointees of President Arroyo. The current composition of the tribunal has made it prone to favoring the administration in its decisions.

Two days in Congress

Normally, a resolution takes weeks to move from one stage to another, but the passage in December 2008 of a resolution extending the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) was instructive: It showed that it is possible to draft and vote on a measure in just one day.

Like charter change, CARP had been deliberated on for a number of Congresses. Instead of allowing CARP to expire at the end of 2008, the Senate and the House—on the last day of session last year—deliberated and voted to extend it for another six months to allow them more time to deliberate on the future of CARP.

In the case of the Villafuerte Resolution, it may take only two session days to pass it.

Once it is filed and referred to the committee on constitutional amendments, it may be taken up and approved by the committee the following day. The plenary may also vote on it during the session on the same day.

Should anybody question the congressional vote before the Supreme Court, it is likely that it will take up the issue at once. Last year, the high court decided—only after four months of deliberation—that the proposed Moro homeland accord was unconstitutional. One of the tribunal’s quickest decisions in recent history, it was handed down a few hours before the proposed agreement was to be signed in Kuala Lumpur.

Four months in Court

In the case of the Villafuerte Resolution, it may even take the Supreme Court less than four months to decide on the issue of joint voting, says constitutional law professor Edwin Lacierda, who is involved in anti-charter change efforts.

“I think it will be even lesser because it’s only a matter of interpretation. Your source materials are few. You have the records of the Constitutional Commission. There was really nothing there because it was silent on the issue precisely,” he said.

Lacierda said the justices may also choose to invite amicus curiae, or sources that can help enlighten the justices on the pending issue. Easy picks are the former members of the Constitutional Commission that drafted the 1987 Constitution.

In a similar situation in 1973, the Supreme Court—also perceived then as a court controlled by President Ferdinand Marcos—took only two months to declare as valid the ratification of the 1973 Constitution. That Constitution was questioned on the ground that it was not properly ratified according to law.

With the blessing of the Supreme Court, the 1973 Constitution paved the way for the extension of the term of President Marcos, who was only ousted by a People Power revolt in 1986.

Pre-election year

More similarities with past experiences—especially recent ones—abound.

In late 2006, about a year before President Arroyo’s fallout with Lakas founder and co-chair Jose de Venecia Jr., the latter used his influence as Speaker to force the convening of a constituent assembly despite protests from senators.

Political observers said the 2006 efforts could have succeeded if not for the massive protests led by the Catholic church and the business and militant groups.

Back then, it was perceived that the administration was confident that its efforts to amend the charter would succeed because it put together a weak senatorial line for the following year’s elections. Observers interpreted it as a sign that the administration didn’t mind losing in a national election that might not take place anyway.

Critics now fear the familiar: The administration is yet to choose a presidential candidate for the 2010 elections since it is confident—again— that it can make charter change happen before the next polls.

President Arroyo’s critics believe that opening the Constitution to changes now will give her allies the opportunity to prolong her stay in power by making her head of state or prime minister in a changed form of government.

Lakas-Christian Muslim Democrats, her adoptive party that she now chairs, also tried but failed to amend the Constitution in 1997 to lift the term limit on President Fidel Ramos, the party’s chair emeritus. —with research assistance from Jesus Llanto

PerryScope
By Perry Diaz

“The President will support those who will continue her vision and those who have a proven track record in being the leader regardless of who he or she maybe as this point in time,” announced Press Secretary Cerge Remonde. He also said that “Malacañang may look at the possibility of adopting Pampanga Governor Ed Panlilio as its standard bearer in the 2010 presidential elections.” The question that comes to mind is: If “vision” and “leadership” is what President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo were looking for in a presidential candidate, what is her vision and what kind of a leader is she?

Let’s look at her “vision.” She declared a couple of years ago that she wanted the Philippines to be a “first world” country in 20 years — an “Enchanted Kingdom.” She promised to eradicate poverty, stamp out corruption, and put an end to the communist insurgency and Islamic rebellion.

Since then, the Philippines has become the most corrupt country in Asia and Gloria the most corrupt president in the country’s history. Instead of progressing and moving forward, the country is retrogressing and moving backward. All the gains she proclaimed a few years ago are vanishing. The rich are becoming richer and the poor are becoming poorer. The country is going upside down… fast.

If there is one element that can be attributed to Gloria’s failure, it’s her lack of leadership. She had the opportunity to make a difference when she was catapulted by “people power” to the presidency in 2001. But instead of uplifting the people from the ravages of poverty and leading them to the promised “Enchanted Kingdom” in the First World, she led them on the road to eternal perdition in the World of the Damned.

And now that the end of her presidency is near, she is looking for a way to stay in power any which way she can. Indeed, there are several ways that she could hold on to power. However, they’re risky to undertake. She has to line up all the ducks in perfect formation. If one duck goes out of formation, the rest will be quacking their way out in all directions.

Recently, former Speaker Jose de Venecia, Jr. revealed that he was approached by Gloria’s son, Congressman Juan Miguel “Mikey” Arroyo, and Congressman Martin Romualdez with an “indecent proposal.” De Venecia said that the two tried to solicit his support for Charter change (Cha-cha) in exchange for the Speakership. He told the media, “I turned down the request for me to help because they are not telling the Filipino people the truth.” He believes that the real reason for Cha-cha is to extend Gloria’s term.

At this time, the proponents of Cha-cha in the House of Representatives have about 180 supporters, about 17 shy of the 197 votes needed to convene a Constituent Assembly (Con-Ass). However, even if they would get the votes in the House, a strong resistance from the Senate was expected. In that event, the Supreme Court would have to step in to resolve the issue which many people believe would be favorable to Gloria.

But time is running out for Gloria to pursue Cha-cha. She might tinker with the idea of declaring martial law and then nudge Congress to amend the constitution to change the form of government to parliamentary system. Wasn’t that what Marcos did when he declared martial law in 1972?

Should Gloria decide to go ahead with martial law, she needs the support of the military. However, Gen. Alexander Yano, the current Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, is perceived as a “straight shooter” and the epitome of professional soldier. Many political insiders believe that he would not support martial law. And without the support of the military top brass, Gloria has to look at other ways to stay in power.

If Gloria fails to extend her term of office, then she might take the role of “kingmaker” by using all her political resources and personal wealth to underwrite the campaign of her handpicked candidate or “manok.” With the new president indebted to her, she could wield enormous political — and economic — power working behind the scenes. It would be business as usual.

Lately, the person who is emerging as Gloria’s possible choice for president is Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro, a young and bright politician with the right credentials: a bar topnotch, a former Congressman, a member of a rich and powerful clan, and the heir apparent to his uncle Danding Cojuangco’s Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC). But it is for his credentials that would make Gloria wary of Teodoro. While Cojuangco is currently in the best of terms with Gloria and her husband Mike, that could easily change. Didn’t someone once say, “There are no permanent friends and no permanent enemies, only permanent self-interest”?

The question is: Can Gloria control Teodoro should he become president? My take is that Teodoro would not allow himself to be the “manok” of Gloria. More than likely, he would run as the standard bearer of NPC, not under Gloria’s KAMPI-Lakas coalition. The reason is: Gloria’s endorsement is tantamount to a “kiss of death.” With Gloria’s unpopularity with the people, the candidate she handpicks would most likely lose unless she would use the “tools” at her disposal like what she allegedly used during the 2004 presidential election. With the brand-new Comelec automated election system to be implemented in the 2010 elections, who knows what “glitches” the system would have that could change the election results.

It is not then surprising when Gloria’s spin doctors put out the “welcome” mat for Panlilio’s possible entry into the presidential derby. Why not? After all, Panlilio is Gloria’s province mate or “kabalen.” However, Panlilio immediately nipped it in the bud. The last thing he wanted to happen is to create the impression that he shares Gloria’s “vision” and “leadership style.”

In a recent media statement, Panlilio said that if and when elected president of the Philippines in 2010, he “will not declare the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos a hero and will see to it that President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo is prosecuted for corruption.” With that, Panlilio had distanced himself from getting smacked with Gloria’s “kiss of death.”