Cha-cha wanted to handle Structure’s wordings – Puno

Home of Representatives. (PNA photograph by Joan Bondoc)

MANILA, Philippines — The complicated wording of the 1987 Structure—that includes a bicameral Congress regardless of reflecting a unicameral spirit—is already a urgent cause to push for Constitution change (Cha-cha), Deputy Speaker and Antipolo 1st District Rep. Ronaldo Puno mentioned on Tuesday.

Throughout a press briefing on the Batasang Pambansa complicated, Puno defined that the constitutional framers initially supposed a unicameral Congress, the place district representatives and senators would sit as one physique.

Nonetheless, after they retained the bicameral setup, they didn’t revise the unique wording, which was aligned with a unicameral design.

“You realize, all people has been saying for the previous 20, 30 years that the Structure wants a number of correction already as a result of the Structure was first drafted for a unicameral authorities, unicameral legislature. However in the direction of the top of the Constitutional Conference, there was a sudden change to a bicameral legislature,” he mentioned.

“Nonetheless, lots of the provisions within the Structure remained as provisions for a unicameral legislature. And so this has led to a number of issues over the numerous a long time previous. There’s at all times been disagreement about whether or not votes ought to be joined or separate, whether or not the Structure meant this or that,” he added. “We imagine that if we appropriate and replace our Structure now that lots of the disputes that we see in entrance of us wouldn’t have been right here or will be averted.”

Puno pointed to a number of debatable provisions within the 1987 Structure, reminiscent of whether or not the Home of Representatives and the Senate ought to vote collectively on sure issues or solid their votes individually.

He mentioned the Structure is obscure on this situation, utilizing the phrase “a vote of Congress” with out clarifying whether or not it refers to all members—senators and Home representatives—voting collectively or individually.

“A vote of Congress, however it was not talked about if it was the Senate or the Home. Nearly all of Congress didn’t specify, as all members of Congress, as a result of they had been speeding in the direction of the top. So the entire earlier provisions of the structure that utilized to unicameral have didn’t be corrected,” he added.

This situation additionally arises relating to Congress’ membership within the Judicial Bar Council, the place just one member of Congress is taken into account a member. Puno mentioned this has resulted within the chairpersons of the justice panels within the Home and Senate serving alternate phrases.

“We should always appropriate that as a result of, for instance, as I discussed yesterday, the Judicial Bar Council, it has so many members. But it surely solely permits one member from Congress, so the senator and congressman, the consultant, they change seats each six months,” Puno mentioned.

“However the entire different members proceed, yearly, the entire 12 months, they sit as members till the top of their phrases. So I feel, the structure’s framers didn’t intend to have the elected congressman or senator share phrases, and serve half-terms,” he added.

On Monday, Puno delivered a privilege speech calling for amendments to the Structure to handle ambiguous provisions.

Puno will not be the primary lawmaker to spotlight the Structure’s unique intent of building a unicameral Congress. Former Albay 1st District Rep. Edcel Lagman mentioned in March 2024 that if Constitution change proposals proceed, the Senate and Home ought to convene as a single physique and finally vote collectively.

Lagman added that this method displays the tactic initially supposed by the Structure’s framers—a unicameral Congress.

“You realize, former Chief Justice Puno mentioned this about Article 17, Part 1 of the Structure, which states that amendments can push ahead by a three-fourths vote. Chief Justice Puno mentioned that is an inadvertence, they forgot to repair the unique provisions as a result of the members of the Constituent Fee thought Congress can be unicameral,” Lagman mentioned.

“We additionally want to stay with the earlier provisions of the Structure, of the constituent meeting that they need to meet collectively first, collectively as a result of that’s two Homes of Congress, not separate. What we’re doing now’s separate, like a pair being divorced. However that’s not the case, it ought to be a joint assembly, as a result of congressmen and senators don’t attend the constituent meeting as legislators,” he added.

READ: Lagman: 1987 Structure intends joint voting of Congress for Cha-cha

For the twentieth Congress, the Home management has remained silent on the prospects of Cha-cha. Nonetheless, on July 15, Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin filed RBH No. 1, in search of to amend the 1987 Structure’s provisions on nationwide territory and the financial system.

Garbin mentioned the proposal intently resembles these filed and accepted by the 18th and nineteenth Congresses, aside from modifications to the territorial provisions. He goals to include the 2016 Everlasting Courtroom of Arbitration ruling, which affirmed the Philippines’ unique rights over its waters.

READ: Cha-cha on once more: Adjustments to territorial, financial provisions pushed

Garbin and Manila sixth District Rep. Bienvenido Abante Jr. imagine that at the same time as the present administration is within the second half of its time period, there may be sufficient time to sort out Cha-cha proposals./mcm