|
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Malilong: Haughtiness behind Pirma II
By Frank Malilong Jr.
The Other Side
On Dec. 6, 1996, Jesus Delfin, founding member of the People’s Initiative for Reforms, Modernization and Action (Pirma) petitioned the Commission on Elections (Comelec) to set in motion the amendment of the Constitution through people’s initiative.
Pirma wanted the term limits of all elective government officials lifted to pave the way for then president Fidel V. Ramos to seek a second term.
Less than two weeks later, Sen. Miriam Santiago, lawyer Alex Padilla and Jaime Ongpin’s widow, Maria Isabel Ongpin went to the Supreme Court to stop the Comelec from entertaining the Pirma petition because there was no law enabling a people’s initiative. The petition also claimed that lifting the term limits was not a mere amendment but a revision, which cannot be done through people’s initiative.
On March 19, 1997, the High Tribunal permanently enjoined the Comelec “from entertaining or taking cognizance of any petition for initiative on amendments to the Constitution” until an enabling law was passed.
Then associate justice Hilario Davide Jr. penned the decision. Chief Justice Andres Narvasa and Justices Florenz D. Regalado, Flerida Ruth P. Romero, Josue N. Bellosillo, Santiago M. Kapunan, Robert J. Torres Jr. and another Cebuano, Regino Hermosisima Jr., concurred.
It was not a unanimous decision though. Justice Reynato S. Puno insisted that Republic Act 6735 was sufficient to enable the exercise of people’s initiative as a mode to amend the Constitution. Justices Jose Melo, Vicente Mendoza, Ricardo Francisco and Artemio V. Panganiban joined him.
The Court skirted the issue of whether lifting the term limits constituted an amendment or a revision of the Constitution, saying that further discussion of the issue was unnecessary, if not academic. That the parties, however, took pains to explain their position on whether the proposal was an amendment or a revision showed that they agreed that the two processes are distinct from each other.
In its decision, the Supreme Court urged Congress “not to tarry any longer” in passing an adequate enabling law. “The system of initiative to propose amendments to the Constitution should no longer be kept in the cold; it should be given flesh and blood, energy and strength,” it declared.
Almost a decade has passed since the Supreme Court gave the unsolicited advice, which has however remained unheeded. In the meantime, another group has proposed to revise the Constitution, taking exactly the same route that Pirma used.
Of the 13 justices who decided the Santiago petition (Justice Sabino Padilla did not take part), only two are still with the Court: Panganiban, who is now chief justice, and Puno. Both disagreed with their colleagues in 1997.
No law or jurisprudence is written on granite. Could this explain the arrogance and haughtiness behind Pirma II?
For Bisaya stories from Cebu. Click here. (August 30, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor.Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board.Click here.
(fmmalilong@yahoo.com) |
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
SUPERBALITA
WEEKEND
|
