A LOCAL official said he could not see the logic behind the railroading of House Resolution (HR) 1109, a measure that would convene Congress into a "Senate-less" constituent assembly (Con-Ass).

In an interview with Sun.Star Cagayan de Oro, City Councilor Ramon Tabor said tinkering with the Constitution entails time and continuous deliberation.

View photos of anti-Charter change rally from around the country
For minute updates follow Sun.Star on Twitter

"For me, I'm in favor -- from the very beginning -- of Charter change. However, let us do it properly, legally, and let us do it in accordance [with the law]," Tabor said.

He said Senate would never allow House of Representatives to amend the Charter without them voting separately on the matter. Last year, Senate unanimously issued a resolution declaring any move of Lower House to amend the constitution without them voting separately would be deemed "unconstitutional."

"They vote separately, majority of the House of Representatives and the majority of Senate. That is our system because we have a bicameral form of legislative body," he said.

Tabor cited the changing of Mindanao Polytechnic State College (MPSC) to Mindanao University of Science and Technology (Must) as an example.

"There is a Senate version of that, which was why Sen. Miguel Zubiri was there in the ceremonies as the main author of the bill in Senate. While Cagayan de Oro 2nd district Rep. Rufus Rodriguez was also there because he authored the Lower House's version of the same bill," he said.

He added even a simple act of changing a street name requires Lower House's and Senate's versions of the act. "How much more for the Constitution, now they're saying they'll amend it without the Senate? I do not see the logic," Tabor said.

He pointed out that what Lower House intends to amend is not just a mere resolution or ordinance but the fundamental law of the country that could not be finished in just a span of "two to three months."

"A constituent assembly without the participation and conformity of Senate [would make it] illegal and unconstitutional," he said.

Tabor -- a lawyer by profession -- said that it would take years, continuous deliberation, and invitations of scholars to give their views on amendment of provisions in the Constitution.

"Just like for amendments on economic provisions, you invite Neda [National Economic and Development Authority], for political provisions you invite constitutionalists to guide you. It must be orderly and not hastily. That is how you do it," he explained.

He suspects that congressmen are keyed up in amending the constitution for a "hidden" agenda, but adds he is confident the Palace-sponsored HR 1109 would not prosper.

"I am now suspecting that there is a hidden agenda-ensakto man na. To me, I think they [congressmen] want to change this Constitution for a specific agenda. However, I am very pessimistic it would be ratified because it would still be ratified by the people. And now, they want to include the ratification in the coming 2010 national elections," Tabor said.

Doing so, he said would only wreak havoc in the Commission on Elections (Comelec) -- with its provincial staffing, acutely undermanned.

"That will not prosper -- it will be scrapped. We should hold separate plebiscites for that purpose only; where it would be clearly stated what provisions in the Constitution would be amended. You do not just include a single question in the ballots," Tabor said.

Part of the machinations

Tabor said he doubts the real motive of Oliver Lozano when the latter filed the petition against HR 1109, which was subsequently dismissed by Supreme Court for being "premature."

The petition, he said, only served to muddle the issue and went on to claim Lozano might be "part of the machinations" of Malacañang.

"Why did he file the petition when, being a lawyer, he knows the timing was still premature. Tan-awa karon, ang mga tao maka-ingon na hinuon nga ensakto lagi mi, sayop lagi sila," Tabor explained.

"That is what I fear, that ordinary people might think Supreme Court's dismissal of the complaint as premature would lead people to think that the House of Representatives were right when it decided to convene a constituent assembly without the Senate," he added.

Tabor concurs with Supreme Court's decision, as it is the Lower House's prerogative to constitute themselves in an assembly -- more so, because the latter has not yet convened as a constituent assembly, he said.

"As of now, my stand is there is nothing illegal here -- meaning the petition is really premature. Most people are anticipating that they will push through with it. What if they would not?" he opined.

However, Tabor was quick to add that if the Lower House would start tweaking the Constitution without the conformity (and) participation of Senate, that would be the right time to question the legality of the Lower House's move.

"That becomes a violation of the Constitution. That is where we should strongly condemn. That is the reason why the petition was premature."

Respect for differing opinion

When asked to comment on Archbishop Antonio Ledesma's "cold shoulder" treatment to visiting solons last week who inked HR 1109, Tabor replied respecting an opposing view is the main discourse of a democratic society.

"That is what you call respecting other people's opinion. At least, the good archbishop respected their [Reps. Antonino and Emano] stand and I hope the congressional representatives would also respect the stand of the church," Tabor said.

"For me, I respect the stand of those who voted for HR 1109. I would not question their wisdom. However, I expect them not to question my stand that I am not in favor of what they did," he added.

"You know, [ultimately] it would be the people which would judge us; history will judge us of what we do. Mao man nang para nako tinonto gyud nang ila," Tabor said.