CONGRESS has again turned its sights on revamping the Constitution but its leaders yesterday pledged that amendments would be limited this time to economic provisions seen as restricting foreign investments.
“There was a consensus on the procedure so charter change has a better chance now than before,” House Majority Leader Neptali M. Gonzales II said after a legislative summit at the Edsa Shangri-La hotel.
Amending the 1987 Constitution is a contentious issue, particularly since initial attempts starting in the ’90s centered on extending elected officials’ term limits. This had the effect of sidelining proposals to lift constitutionally-mandated caps and exclusions on foreign ownership of land, property and the practice of certain professions.
Legislators have also quarreled over the interpretation of a provision stating that “any amendment… may be proposed by the Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its members,” which some say will concentrate voting power on the numerically superior House of Representatives.
To resolve this, Senator Franklin M. Drilon proposed a “bicameral constituent assembly” where charter change proposals would undergo “normal legislative process.” This means separate committee hearings and voting — using the constitutionally-mandated three-fourths rule — at the House and the Senate.
“Should there be differences in the versions passed by the two chambers, then a bicameral committee is formed to come out with a reconciled version, after which the same is voted again by each chamber by a three-fourths vote of all its members,” Mr. Drilon said.
Congress’ approved amendments will then be subjected to a plebiscite.
“There is unanimity on this and this could be done,” Mr. Drilon said.
Legislators yesterday insisted that only economic provisions would be discussed this time.
“There is great amount of common agreement on what should be tackled with respect to Constitution and we all agreed on economic provisions and nothing more,” House Speaker Feliciano R. Belmonte, Jr. (4th district, Quezon City) said after the legislative summit.
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile added, “All of us agreed that we are doing this not for parochial concerns but in recognition of the need of the country and the people to really address our problems, to find a way to hasten the solutions and move this country faster forward in the future.”
The Palace, however, remained lukewarm on amending the Constitution but representatives of foreign chambers welcomed the news.
“The President maintains his position that there is no compelling need to amend the Constitution,” Presidential Spokesman Edwin Lacierda said in a text message.
But John D. Forbes, American Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines legislative committee chairman, said the changes were needed to “improve the investment climate.”
“It seems the modern thing to do in order to increase national competitiveness,” he said in a telephone interview.
Resolutions calling for charter change have been filed in both chambers. Public hearings were started last month by the House committee on constitutional amendments.
==============================================================================
By: NMG
Source: Business World, Sept. 30, 2011
To view the original article, click here.
Comment here