Wrong manner, wrong reasonsfor Cha-cha’ - Malaya 08.30.2006

BY DENNIS GADIL

FORMER Vice President Teofisto Guingona yesterday said charter change by any form should be held only when the nation is at peace and its people and its leaders have stopped bickering.

"I believe (that) when the head of the family is charged with many offenses and when one of the children proposes to remodel the house, it would not be conducive," Guingona told the Senate committee on revision of laws and code which is conducting hearings on proposed bills providing for a people’s initiative law.

He said: "Cha-cha is being proposed in a wrong manner and for the wrong reasons and I would like to stress the wrong manner."

Guingona said the country is not in the mood for charter change.

"Not now when the people are divided," he said.

The former vice president said the 1935 and 1987 Constitutions were drafted and adopted during tranquil times.

"The 1935 Constitution came into being when the nation was at peace, without too much bickering," he said.

He said the situation was similar when in 1987 the nation, after ousting Ferdinand Marcos, settled down to ponder and approve a new constitution.

He said charter change now would further divide the country.

Guingona, however, was cut short by committee chair Sen. Richard Gordon who advised him to limit his statements on the three proposed bills on people’s initiative.

Guingona said he will submit a written comment of the three proposed measures.

The Gordon committee called the hearing on three bills filed by Miriam Defensor-Santiago, Loi Ejercito-Estrada and Gordon providing for an enabling law on people’s initiative.

Congress has yet to pass an enabling law after the Supreme Court ruled that RA 6735 or the Referendum and Initiative Law is an inadequate vehicle to flesh out the constitutional provision on people’s initiative.

Members of the panel and resource speakers could not agree on what constitutes an amendment or a revision.

People’s initiative is limited to proposing amendments but not revisions.

Sen. Rodolfo Biazon said his understanding is that a change in the carter constitutes a revision.

Salvador Carlota, dean of the UP College of Law, said calling for a shift to parliamentary and for the abolition of the Senate should be classified as a revision.

"People’s initiative can’t be used to revise the Constitution," said.

Solicitor General Eduardo Antonio Nachura said a revision could contain many amendments.

"Amendments could mean a change of an entire article (of the Constitution)," Nachura said.

Nachura said reversing the regalian doctrine and empowering Congress to restructure the bureaucracy, for example, "should be treated as mere amendments and not a revision."

He said the current definitions on what is an amendment and a revision "could stand a little change, little modification."

EN BANC HEARING

Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos Sr. set an en banc hearing tomorrow to tackle the petition.

"We have already discussed the matter even without the petition. The issues have long been there," he said.

He said he is inclined to submit the petition for resolution within two days.

Sigaw ng Bayan spokesman Raul Lambino said the Comelec should immediately come up with a decision.

He said that should the Comelec dismiss the petition, Sigaw ng Bayan and Ulap will elevate the issue to the Supreme Court.

Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman clarified that what he urged the Comelec to do was to resolve the petition on people’s initiative.

Lagman on Monday said the Comelec should test the injunction before the Supreme Court.
Lagman has said that there are legal constraints in the petition because the Supreme Court injunction. – With Czeriza Valencia and Regina Bengco