Groups oppose proposed Cha-cha

Groups oppose proposed Cha-cha

PROGRESSIVE groups are opposing another attempt to change the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which some lawmakers are currently pushing for.

In a press release, Anakbayan-Southern Mindanao said they "vehemently condemns" the proposed charter change or "Cha-cha" under the administration of President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr.

While the group said that Marcos had already made pronouncements that it is not a priority under his administration, the push for Cha-cha is still being lobbied.

Progressive groups staged a protest at Freedom Park in Roxas Avenue, Davao City on Thursday, March 2 opposing the proposed Cha-cha.

The group staged the protest while Senator Robinhood "Robin" C. Padilla presided over the hearing of the Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes in Davao City.

The public hearing is said to propose amendments to economics provisions in the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, specifically on Article 12 Section 2,3,7,10 and 11, Article 14 Section 4 (2), and 16 Section 11 (1,2).

The hearing also discussed constitutional amendments and revision of Codes of Review and Study the 1987 Constitution for possible revision on the provisions particular to the form, structure, and power of government, economy, and patrimony, and for other purposes.

The group said the proposed charter change not only aims to open the floodgates for foreign control of our economy but also to extend the terms of political dynasties, including the Marcoses.

According to the group, there will be a revision of electoral processes and term limits of government officials.

The Charter Change pushes for a tandem system which ensures the power of both presidential and vice presidential seats on the same party organization, consolidating political power in the government. Term limits are to be set from one six-year term to two five-year terms.

“In other words, this is a veiled extension of term limits which will allow corrupt officials to monopolize power for ten years,” the group said, adding it is a “violation” of the “established democratic rights of the Filipino[s].”

Padilla, during the hearing, refuted statements that his proposal of allowing foreign investors is a betrayal to the country, hence it only aims to give an immediate opportunity for Filipinos.

“The Philippines with its complicated investment regulations that emanated from the prohibitive economic provisions of the constitution, is now lagging behind other Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries on foreign direct investment registry despite its offer of tax holidays, and other fiscal incentives,” Padilla said on his resolution of both houses no. 3.

According to Padilla’s economic provision, in Article 12, also known as National Economy and Patrimony, section 2,3,7,10 and 11, Article 14 in the field of education, section 4 (2), and Article 16 that includes the general provisions, particularly section 11 (1,2) will all still be restricted “unless otherwise provided by law”.

“Ibig sabihin po nito, ‘yong mga kasamahan po natin na mga mambabatas, sila po ang gagawa ng patakaran (It means that our lawmakers will be the one who will make the provisions),” Padilla said.

He added that with his proposal to amend the economic provision, it will offer flexibility to the lawmakers. They will be the one who will decide the ownership scheme between the foreign investors and Filipino like a 50-50 or 80-20 ownership arrangement.

He added that in order to amend the economic provision, the constitutional assembly (con-ass) is the ideal method.

Trending

No stories found.

Just in

No stories found.

Branded Content

No stories found.
SunStar Publishing Inc.
www.sunstar.com.ph