On Charter Change...
Though it may be true that Change is the only permanent thing in life, and that to keep up with these modern times, we have to bid goodbye to the old and the traditional, it is a personal belief that the need for change is not applicable to our Constitution at present.
Being the fundamental law of the land, it is not a wonder why the 1987 Constitution is at the forefront of every controversy, whether it be between the administration and the opposition, the middle class versus the economy’s bigwigs, the faithful versus the government, the conservative versus the liberals, the human rights activists versus the loyalists. It is at the core of every issue that countless are the attempts to amend it, from FVR’s PIRMA, Erap’s CONCORD to PGMA’s Consultative Commission. But time and time again, the Supreme Court, has always proven itself to be the last bastion of democracy by curbing them to the benefit of our status as a state and nation.
Do we really need a charter change and do we need it now? These questions I strongly answer in the negative. First, the constitution is comprised mostly of principles that adhere to what is universally right, just and equitable. Being such, it is not bound by time nor era to be inutile to meet the contingencies of the here and now. The economic, social and political problems that beset us are not due to its inadequacy but are rather rooted from its misapplication, wrong implementation and even abuse of its provisions. Second, if the last statement were absolutely true, the problem lies with man and in his will to fight for what is true and just regardless of the propensity to be self-serving. Moral Reform therefore and not Charter Change is needed. Third, the constitution embodies the country’s sovereignty that we cannot just throw and adopt another impulsively. If it must be determinative of our actions and of our relations with other countries, we must preserve its supreme authority regardless of the pressures of the world outside. And last, the Philippines is presently economically, politically and socially unstable that it would be unwise to change the status quo. Pushing for amendments despite the majority’s dissentions would only put the country in turmoil and further jeopardy.
Do we really need a charter change and do we need it now? These questions I strongly answer in the negative. First, the constitution is comprised mostly of principles that adhere to what is universally right, just and equitable. Being such, it is not bound by time nor era to be inutile to meet the contingencies of the here and now. The economic, social and political problems that beset us are not due to its inadequacy but are rather rooted from its misapplication, wrong implementation and even abuse of its provisions. Second, if the last statement were absolutely true, the problem lies with man and in his will to fight for what is true and just regardless of the propensity to be self-serving. Moral Reform therefore and not Charter Change is needed. Third, the constitution embodies the country’s sovereignty that we cannot just throw and adopt another impulsively. If it must be determinative of our actions and of our relations with other countries, we must preserve its supreme authority regardless of the pressures of the world outside. And last, the Philippines is presently economically, politically and socially unstable that it would be unwise to change the status quo. Pushing for amendments despite the majority’s dissentions would only put the country in turmoil and further jeopardy.
Granting however that there are provisions which need amendment, those who spearhead the cha-cha attempts are amiss in contending that the following will address our present situation:
· Changing the Legislature to Unicameral to stop overspending and redundancy.
On the contrary, if the bicameral becomes unicameral, there will be a monopoly of wealth by the chosen few. The positions will be highly coveted, being lucrative rather than being of public service. Also, here in our setting, there is really no redundancy which the unicameral system seeks to correct, as while one district representative would eats his heart out to pass good resolutions to benefit his constituents, another one in congress spends most of his time conducting investigations and inquiries on administrative offenses.
On the contrary, if the bicameral becomes unicameral, there will be a monopoly of wealth by the chosen few. The positions will be highly coveted, being lucrative rather than being of public service. Also, here in our setting, there is really no redundancy which the unicameral system seeks to correct, as while one district representative would eats his heart out to pass good resolutions to benefit his constituents, another one in congress spends most of his time conducting investigations and inquiries on administrative offenses.
· Adopting a Parliamentary form of Govt.
In a Parliamentary form of government, there will be no proper differentiation of the branches and thus there will be no checks and balances which is needed considering the high incidence of corruption. The Prime Minister and the Members will be easily polarized to do what serves them well and the Prime Minister, owing his position to the parliament and not directly to the people will be at the Parliament’s whims. Sovereignty will not reside on us but on those who have gained a seat in power. This is absolutely incongruous to our clamor for a government that is of, by and for the people.
In a Parliamentary form of government, there will be no proper differentiation of the branches and thus there will be no checks and balances which is needed considering the high incidence of corruption. The Prime Minister and the Members will be easily polarized to do what serves them well and the Prime Minister, owing his position to the parliament and not directly to the people will be at the Parliament’s whims. Sovereignty will not reside on us but on those who have gained a seat in power. This is absolutely incongruous to our clamor for a government that is of, by and for the people.
· Practicing Economic Liberalization.
Removing restrictions on the exploitation of the country and allowing 100% foreign owned corporations to own land, public utilities, educational institutions will attract investors but it will degrade our country’s sovereignty, destroy our environment, leave many landless, and will once again instill in us a colonial mindset. Though we have to compete with the rest in the quest for development, we cannot just jump into the bandwagon of economic liberalization at the expense of the death of our local businesses. Though we have to keep abreast of modernities, we cannot afford to lose our identity in the guise of trade freedom. Though we cannot totally close our doors in isolation, we cannot also lay all our cards in a game we are sure to lose. With the Philippines being blessed with natural resources, it is best that we look within and improve and make use of what is ours for ourselves primarily. The agriculture industry, for example has to be empowered, first to ensure our survival and then the growth of small time businesses.
Removing restrictions on the exploitation of the country and allowing 100% foreign owned corporations to own land, public utilities, educational institutions will attract investors but it will degrade our country’s sovereignty, destroy our environment, leave many landless, and will once again instill in us a colonial mindset. Though we have to compete with the rest in the quest for development, we cannot just jump into the bandwagon of economic liberalization at the expense of the death of our local businesses. Though we have to keep abreast of modernities, we cannot afford to lose our identity in the guise of trade freedom. Though we cannot totally close our doors in isolation, we cannot also lay all our cards in a game we are sure to lose. With the Philippines being blessed with natural resources, it is best that we look within and improve and make use of what is ours for ourselves primarily. The agriculture industry, for example has to be empowered, first to ensure our survival and then the growth of small time businesses.
· Having further decentralization leading to a federal system
The creation of a cohesive Philippines is now a difficulty considering that he Philippines is a confluence of diverse cultures and is an archipelago. If there will be further decentralization, uniting the different island groups would almost be an impossibility. Worse, the Philippines as a single international person would cease to exist.
The creation of a cohesive Philippines is now a difficulty considering that he Philippines is a confluence of diverse cultures and is an archipelago. If there will be further decentralization, uniting the different island groups would almost be an impossibility. Worse, the Philippines as a single international person would cease to exist.
· Adding a Bill of Duties and Obligations
We have more than enough good laws that prescribe the Filipino’s duties that some of these laws have even been left in obscurity. What we really lack is their stringent implementation to be able to assess their efficacy.
We have more than enough good laws that prescribe the Filipino’s duties that some of these laws have even been left in obscurity. What we really lack is their stringent implementation to be able to assess their efficacy.
Considering all the points, it would be of no reason for us to advocate the need for change. Though much political will is now being used to assert it, as long as we prize democracy high and as long as we Filipinos are socially aware, the proposals will only come to naught as more than the fact of their inapplicability and impracticability, the spirit of greed for power that motivates their proponents is clearly evident. This motivation is one which we Filipinos surely detest and thus, the Cha-Cha is one which we surely deter to happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment