Will the Supreme Court say yes?

Almost every time the phone rings, the question I am asked is whether I think the Supreme Court will say yes to the Sigaw ng Bayan’s and Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines’ (ULAP) petition to allow the People’s Initiative as the bearer of Charter change (Cha-cha). I tell my callers that, although I am not inclined to call up some of my friends in the high tribunal to let that happen, my personal hope is that they will. Because I, along with a lot of people, believe that a shift from the presidential to the parliamentary system will strengthen political stability and spur rapid economic growth.

One of the questions that the Supreme Court is looking at is whether or not to appreciate the 6.3 million signatures that were verified by the COMELEC as sufficient to indicate that the people have spoken through the People’s Initiative. What makes this people power – for how else would it be called – potent is that it meets the constitutional requirement to change the Charter upon petition by at least 12 percent of the electorate, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three percent of its voters. Sigaw ng Bayan and ULAP managed to do it (gathered in fact, 10 million signatures) that lasted for months and took them to all the 213 legislative districts located in 70 provinces all over the country. Despite high-profile efforts to block it, the People’s Initiative prevailed.

As I understand it, after the Supreme Court has said yes, it will remand the case to the COMELEC, which will frame the questions to be presented to the people in a plebiscite that Executive Secretary has announced would be January of next year.

As I said in my previous column, for as long as we remain a democracy, we must respect people power, in whatever form it is expressed or whether it emanates from the elite or the masa.

Change the Charter we should. I have written that Charter change is the best way to address widespread dissatisfaction with our politics. Because it jump starts our national transformation. Because it empowers us to move away from our culture of citizens’ revolutions and focus on economic growth to ensure that each and every Filipino, very soon to number 100 million if we do not manage our population, has three substantial meals a day and, at the very least, a high school education.

Former President Fidel V. Ramos, I wrote, told a World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland five years ago, that we, Filipinos, "may be appealing too often to a political doctrine that should really be a last resort . . . Our country needs a prolonged period of political stability and economic growth – so that our workers and businesspeople can create new social wealth. But we may never have such stability for as long as civil society must intervene to repudiate a specific administration or overthrow a government. We must make future revolutions unnecessary. Filipinos must not allow their political processes, their political institutions and the government leadership to fail again. We must put a stop – once and for all – to the periodic crises that corruption, extravagance, cronyism, irresponsibility, and incompetence inflict on our national society."

Again, I quoted President Ramos as saying, after noting the big percentage of Pinoys supporting Cha-cha, "Let us restart the step-by-step process by which the transformation of the political system from the US-style presidential pattern to the parliamentary system – which, in my view, would favor our fighting poverty, regaining economic momentum; eliminating military-police interventionism; insuring democratic, equitable representation of our people in the legislature; reducing graft and corruption; healing the wounds of economic strife, and, most importantly, bonding more closely our people in our efforts to achieve a better quality of life. This would be our total approach to consolidation and long-term stability – and which can only be achieved through renewal and sacrifice."

One of the provisions of the 1987 Constitution that Cha-cha advocates want to amend is easing current restrictions on the entry of foreign investors. They contend that liberalizing economic policies will bring in much-needed foreign capital in critical areas which neither the government or the private sectors have the resources to develop.

Allowing the entry of foreign investors in these restricted areas will solve the inadequacy in infrastructure and the perennial problem of joblessness that consign millions of Filipinos to a life of misery and want. That is what lawyer Romela Bengzon, former deputy secretary general of the Constitutional Consultative Commission, has been emphasizing in her endless talks on Charter change all over the country.

Also a member of the Constitutional Change Advocacy Commission (Adcom), Bengzon painted a dismal picture of the employment situation, pointing out that in the past 10 years spanning three administrations, unemployment ranged between 10 and 11 percent, and underemployment stood at 25 percent of the country’s 40 million workforce.

Bengzon added that if the Constitution is amended to liberalize the entry of foreign capital, investments can go up in three years, from the current 18 percent to the 35 percent needed for sustained development. Gross domestic production can double in eight years, and in 12 years, the country can see a 100 percent increase in present per capita income of $1,100 which is equivalent to about P58,300 under the present exchange rate."

"We can finally lick poverty and catch up with our neighbor nations," she said, but added though that "Economic reforms would be meaningless if the political structure is not reformed as well, and this should come through a shift to the parliamentary system with a unicameral legislature. Such a shift will eliminate the inherent gridlocks in a bicameral legislative system that often also results in paralyzing conflicts with the executive branch."

* * *

Beating the deadline can be hazardous, as I found out when a friend called me to say I had called her by another name. Mea culpa. My column on Bantayan Island mentioned a visit to the lovely house of Susan Pacheco – not Nena Pacheco – which overlooks Tanyon Strait. I also failed to mention that in Susan’s property are several caves, and one of them can accommodate from six to eight swimmers. Susan should also get an award for planting an assortment of trees around her property. She plans to invite schoolchildren to visit and look at the trees, some of them rare and exotic.

* * *

The American Studies Association of the Philippines board led by its president, Dean Carmelita S. Flores, will hold its general assembly and conference on Nov. 18 at the Ateneo de Manila University, Quezon City . In celebration of the 60th Philippine American Friendship Year, this year’s theme is Philippine and American Media: Critical Interactions and Transformation.

The conference will illumine the factors that shape Philippine media vis-à-vis American media as they hasten the process of cross-cultural pollination, cultural hybridization, acculturation and enculturation. Conference speakers will include a media specialist (via a video conference) and scholars, professionals, and new media technology practitioners. For additional information, call 7358539 or email [email protected]

My e-mail: [email protected]