I am really glad to be part of Center for Social Action. In this office, I actually get a lot of chances getting involve in any societal acitivities. Like for instance, the “may pabaon ka ba diyan” forum with lt.Col. Rabusa (posted If you think you are dying for the country, so be it ). And the most recent, the inaugural hearing of the Necessity to Charter Change with Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago as the chairperson, who actually invited students to come and witness the inaugural hearing in the Senate.
The speakers were Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato Puno who talked about the need for constitutional change, SC Justice Florentino Feliciano who commented on Puno’s speech and report of Preparatory Commission on COnstitutional Reforms, SC Justice Vicente Mendoza and SC Justice Adolfo Azcuna who both talked about the necessity of Cha-Cha for a Parliamentary System of Government, UP President Jose Abueva who gave his speech about the advantage of Cha-Cha in democracy and good governance, and UP Law Dean Merlin Magallona who gave some reflections on Constitutional Change.
I got to somehow take down some of the points given by Chief Justice Puno since he was the first speaker and my retention was still upliving. The bad thing is, hindi matagal ang retention hours ko kaya from the second speaker up to the last, medyo pariwara na ung notes ko. Anyway, I believe hindi lang talaga ako sanay na puro technical terms and naririnig ko na most of the words e first time kong narinig o talagang hindi ko lang maintindihan kasi ang lalim nung english. Kinda nose bleed while on senate! BTW, that was the first time I step on the Senate. :)
Well, Sa tingin ko for my age, ang mahalaga e nakuha ko yung mga basic informations about Charter Change. And thank God because Chief Justice Puno gave it all clearly plus mabagal pa siya magsalita so that’s an advantage! =) Anyway, here are some of the points why we need charter change.
1. The unitary form of government hasn’t been proven to be effective in delivering services to the people since the day it was implemented in the country. It is just an empty complex, according to Cheif Justice Puno. This form of government is not suited to archipelagic country, like Philippines because of deprivation of Political Power over economic power and natural resources. With that, he is proposing the concept of Federalism.
2. The presidential form of government which has been running for over century is messy in reality. The three branches of government must have an equal power with each other. But because of this form, the Executive branch has much power over the two others which is not healthy for a democratic country. Because of different departments under the Executive like Defense, ideological growth in political party has been lacking. And at times of instability, it can provoke the uprising of people power. To avoid this, correction and formation of Theories has been proposed.
3. The Bicameral form of Congress do not interact appropriately in resolving political problems but had been spending an inherent expenses. There are delays in law-making and lack of significant representatives in upper house like Muslims and Indigenous People. To resolve this, it is proposed to have a parliamentary-cameral legislative to have fusion of executive and legislative power for more effective governance. That said, the government would have faster passage of laws in response to high velocity of change.
4. The judicial branch is disected (hindi ko alam kung bakit). There were delayed justices, insufficient fund, inefficient selection process and overranking definition of Judicial power. According to Puno, the shape of the judiciary will depend on the form of government we will adapt. Therefore in parliamentary, Constitutional Court should be separated from the Supreme Court just like South Korea which has an effective constitution going on.
These are just, at least, the basic information given by Chief Justice Puno. I still have notes in other speeches but I’m kinda tired making this blog. I mean, medyo naninibago ako sa mga sinulat ko. Napaka-technical. But since gusto kong ishare yung mga natutunan ko, sinubukan kong magpaka-lawyer sa araw na ito.
If I were to ask what form of government would I agree, I would answer none para magulo, para masaya! JOKE lang. Actually I’m still weighing in the pros and cons of both forms. But as of this time, I am somewhat leaning to parliamentary because i actually had an issue during high school. Tinanong ko yung sarili ko kung bakit kelangang bumoto ng mga kandidato sa student council e samantalang wala akong mapili sa kanila. I told myself, bakit hindi na lang yung mga teachers and magdecide kung sino ang gusto nilang ilagay sa pwesto para alam nilang responsable at may kakayanan talaga yung taong mauupo, Tama? but the usual reason na natatanggap ko? “We are in a democratic country!”
Sometimes, I wanna question lawmakers if democracy, for now in our current situation, is still healthy. I mean, As I notice kasi, napakaraming violation ng tao when it comes to their practice of democracy. It is definitely too much. But I am not saying in my point that being in parliamentary means being not in democracy. Maybe atleast, nababawasan yung paglabag sa demokrasya!
One of the disadvantages of the presidential form of government is the election process. Obvious namang maraming boto ang naibebenta. At least in parliamentary, intellectual finest are amongsts to choose who is/are the right person/s. And the position is not in a fixed tenor. If a certain position is not functioning his right job, he could be kicked out right there and then and place another person who is better and more capable of. Well, that is the positive side. The bad side is paano na lang kung yung mga taong pipili e nababayaran din? Yun lang.
So far yan muna ang aking papanaw ukol sa isyung nakahain! Makata? Before ako mag-end napansin ko nagstart ang hearing nang walang senators except Sen. Miriam, lahat late. Hanep talaga! tsktsk