CHARTER CHANGED EXPOSED

At present, the issue of Charter Change was revived again. Among the prime actors this time are some members of the House of Representatives and the Senate. A parallel movement in the civil society, which has traditionally been opposed to Charter Change, was born amidst the advocacy for federalism and parliamentary form of government. Thus, an impetus for significant social change through the Constitution was generated, also perceived to be opportune and timely.
But such perception was met with opposition. Among the most prominent arguments from the opposition to charter change are the following: it is not timely (given the present socio-political context), it is designed to postpone elections and prolong stay in office by the present regime, and it will open the floodgates to social disturbance and division.


The president,s henchmen from the local government did their part by pushing for charter change in a feeble attempt to deflect the public’s attention from Lozada’s expose’. Weee they expecting that the public would suddenly forget about Lozada and focus on cha cha debates?
The revival of cha cha is clearly a diversionary tactic. But as the Philippine Daily Inquirer’s source aptly puts it, it might backfire on the government. Even former president Fidel Ramos was not able to push through with his plans to amend the constitution in 1997 because of public’s perception that it was being done to prolong his stay in power. What more with Gloria Macapagal Arroyo who is now fighting tooth and nail to be able her seat in Malacanang. It would surely enrage the public even more if and when they push for cha cha.


THUS, THE DEBATE ON THE ACCEPTABILITY OF CONSTITUTENT ASSEMBLY AS A MODE FOR CHANGING THE CONSTITUTION ALSO EMERGED AS AN IMMEDIATE CONCERN.


Therefore, in this situation, it is now imperative to enhance awareness of the issues among the people so that significant participation may be generated and genuinely democratic processes be guaranteed.