Saturday, January 23, 2021

TanDem letter to the Senate Committee on Constitutional Reform - 23 January 2021

 

From: Dindo B. Donato <dbdonato@deszr.com>
Sent: Saturday, 23 January 2021 4:29 PM
To: 'kiko@kikopangilinan.com' <kiko@kikopangilinan.com>; 'senatesecretary.myvillarica@gmail.com' <senatesecretary.myvillarica@gmail.com>; 'os_sotto@yahoo.com' <os_sotto@yahoo.com>; 'sottolegis@gmail.com' <sottolegis@gmail.com>; 'secretariat.batodelarosa@gmail.com' <secretariat.batodelarosa@gmail.com>; 'tolsenate@gmail.com' <tolsenate@gmail.com>
Cc: 'Evelyn Kilayko' <ekilayko@yahoo.com>; 'TD B' <comm_baltazar@yahoo.com>; 'abendrinal@yahoo.com' <abendrinal@yahoo.com>; 'Lilibet Amatong' <lamatong@publicusltd.com>; 
Subject: People's Draft (a crowd-sourced constitution)

 

Hon. Francis N. Pangilinan

Senator

Chairperson, Committee on Constitutional Reform

and Revision of Codes

Senate of the Philippines

Republic of the Philippines

 

Dear Senator Pangilinan,

 

Magandang hapon po. We trust that you are well.

 

Tanggulang Demokrasya (TanDem), Inc., a people’s organization advocating system change, would like to engage your good committee on the matter of constitutional reform. TanDem respectfully requests that its comments on the discussion points for the public hearing on 27 January 2021, be noted for the record and considered for deliberation on this matter.

 

  1. Is there a need amend or revise the 1987 Constitution now, given the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic downturn? What is the proposed timeline for Charter Change, given the upcoming National and Local Elections scheduled in May 2022?

 

TanDem: We believe that the 1987 Constitution should be revised NOW, because our systemic problems cannot be effectively addressed without constitutional reform. The most burdensome economic restrictions are in the constitution, that practically gives the local elite the exclusive privilege to treat the 103M Filipinos as its captive market, like in the public utility industry (TTKT – tubig, telepono, kuryente, transpo) and in the mass media industry (TRID – tv, radyo, internet, dyaryo). Likewise, the manner of electing national officials are in the constitution, that favors the “rich and famous” candidates, because the selection process is by “elections at large.” The Covid-19 pandemic and the economic downturn is the best proof that policy reversals and institutional restructuring should have been done yesterday, instead of today.

 

To save on cost, TanDem proposes that the constitutional reforms be subject to plebiscite at the same time as the national and local elections in May 2022. The question to approve or reject the proposed reforms can be inserted into the long ballot of candidates, or can be made in another short ballot just for the plebiscite.

 

To avoid disruption, TanDem also proposes that the effectivity of the sensitive political reform provisions be deferred to May 2025, with only the economic and social reform provisions taking effect upon approval in a plebiscite in May 2022.

 

  1. Should the amendments or revisions be proposed by a Constitutional Convention or by Congress itself as a constituent assembly? Why?

 

TanDem: We believe that the constitutional reforms should be proposed by Congress in constituent assembly, instead of by Constitutional Convention, because this is fastest and the least cost mode of proposing revisions.

 

We do not believe that a Constitutional Convention will be better than Congress in proposing revisions, or that the former will be free from the influence of vested interests and power brokers compared to the latter, because the delegates to the convention are also elected from the same districts as the congressmen. In other words, a constitutional convention is for practical purposes simply another congress (or like congress no. 2).

 

What is critical is the content of the proposed revisions, rather than the mode of proposing revisions. To ensure that the proposed revisions will not favor vested interests and power brokers, what is important is transparency, or that the people must know what changes are being deliberated.

 

To this end, TanDem in cooperation with its partner organization Publicus Asia, initiated the framing of a crowd-sourced constitution known as the “People’s Draft,” to embody in a single instrument the reforms we believe will promote the general welfare of the people, devoid of clauses protect only the economic elite and the political “rich and famous.”

 

Congress in constituent assembly may then adopt, revise or modify the People’s Draft in the reasonable exercise of its discretion. In case Congress prefers to write its own draft, then the People’s Draft may instead serve as a checklist of the economic, political and social reforms that we would like to see included in its proposed revisions.

 

  1. If Congress convenes as a constituent assembly for the purpose of amending or revising the Constitution, should the Senate and the House of Representatives vote jointly or separately?

 

TanDem: Based on the language and spirit of the 1987 Constitution, we believe there is sufficient legal basis for the Senate and the House of Representatives to convene and vote separately, and in the end, to cumulate their respective votes accordingly. In other words, we respectfully submit that the principle of “separate voting, cumulative counting” may be validly adopted under the 1987 Constitution. If the two houses agree to deliberate and finalize the proposals in a bicameral conference committee, that process is also acceptable, because it does contradict the stated principle, the 1987 Constitution is silent on the specifics of the process, and it may actually faciliate the finalization of proposed revisions to the constitution.

 

Notably, the ultimate lawmaker of a constitution is the people who will directly vote on it. In contrast, the ultimate lawmaker of a statute is the body of the people’s representatives (i.e. senators, representatives) who then vote it. Accordingly, the process of framing proposed revisions to the constitution, must be construed liberally instead of strictly, because in the end, sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them. See Del Rosario v. Carbonell, G.R. No. L-32476, 20 October 1970. See Occena v. Comelec, G.R. No. 56350, 02 April 1981. Attached is a research material on the congressional exercise of constituent powers that presents the legal basis for the principle of “separate voting, cumulative counting.”

 

Attached for the committee’s review are the following materials on the People’s Draft:

  1. Executive Summary v27e (2020),
  2. Full Text v27e (2020),
  3. Comparison with 1987 Constitution v27e (2020),
  4. Comparison with Con-Com Draft v27e (2020).

 

Additional materials are available for download from the System Change folder in the online library of the Law Firm of the undersigned counsel:

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/398fn7r8pl7tuyu/AADUWVJwnpZBu6vxVrErNu2ha/System%20Change?dl=0

 

We believe that reforms should not be limited to the way how our laws are implemented, but should also cover how the laws are made. Most importantly, we think that any meaningful review of our laws should definitely cover the constitution, the highest law of the land.

 

In our view, constitutional reform is the way of a peaceful revolution that can actually change our daily lives and the nation’s fate. To this end, we hope to secure the participation and cooperation of all the major sectors/groups of the country (i.e. clergy, security, polity and society), so that together we can finally realize “system change.”

 

Maraming salamat at ingat po kayo.

 

Sincerely,

 

Atty. Dindo B. Donato

General Counsel

Tanggulang Demokrasya

 

Noted by:

 

Evelyn Kilayko

Chairperson, Tanggulang Demokrasya

 

Teresita D. Baltazar

President, Tanggulang Demokrasya

 

 

Copy Furnished:

 

Hon. Vicente C. Sotto III

Senate President

Senate of the Philippines

Republic of the Philippines

 

Hon. Ronald M. Dela Rosa

Senator

Senate of the Philippines

Republic of the Philippines

 

Hon. Francis N. Tolentino

Senator

Senate of the Philippines

Republic of the Philippines

 

No comments:

Post a Comment