Economic Cha-cha seen as House starts plenary debates

MANILA, Philippines - The proposal to relax the restrictive economic provisions in the Constitution moved closer to approval as plenary discussions on the resolution began last night in the House of Representatives.

Davao City Rep. Mylene Garcia-Albano, chairperson of the House committee on constitutional amendments, delivered on the floor the sponsorship speech for Resolution of Both Houses No.1, which seeks to ease restrictions on some provisions of Articles XII (National Economy and Patrimony), XIV (Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports), and XVI (General Provisions) of the Constitution.

Authored by several House leaders led by Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr., the resolution seeks to insert the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” to selected provisions. This means the economic restrictions remain until Congress opts to remove them via normal legislation.

The Constitution limits foreign ownership of businesses to 40 percent.

Once approved by both the House and the Senate, the document will be subjected to a nationwide plebiscite.

Cagayan de Oro Rep. Rufus Rodriguez and Cavite Rep. Elpidio Barzaga also separately sponsored RBH No. 1 before the plenary last night.

“The issue at hand is the vital role of Congress as an institution to fulfill its constitutional mandate in exercising its constituent power when necessary and crucial to the people’s welfare and the country’s economic progress,” Albano said.

“By freeing the people from the monopolistic activities of the rich Filipino elite, the exercise of such power will be one of the most nationalistic and patriotic act that this institution can do. Economic nationalism should not promote the welfare of the small minority of rich countrymen at the expense of the poor, large majority,” she added.

The lawmakers also said the country’s economy could not fully take off while unemployment and poverty remain high in the past decades because of the lack of foreign direct investment (FDI) due to restrictions imposed by the Constitution.