Charter Change

[BBKuya Germs]

Are you in favor of changing our constitution? Give PROs and CONs.

[BBKuya Germs]

Poll registrars asked to check signatures for Charter change

First posted 06:35pm (Mla time) Mar 28, 2006
By Jerome Aning
Inquirer

COMMISSION on Elections chairman Benjamin Abalos Sr. has given local election registrars the go-signal to verify the signatures of those who want Charter change via a people’s initiative.

Abalos said Tuesday he did not believe his order would violate the Supreme Court's 1997 decision prohibiting the Comelec from entertaining any people's initiative for constitutional amendments unless Congress enacted an enabling law first.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Comelec could take cognizance of a petition for initiative for Charter change only after the petition was filed, Abalos said.

“Before the petition is filed, the Comelec can only prescribe the form of the petition, issue through its Election Records and Statistics Office a certificate on the total number of registered voters in each legislative district; assist, through its election registrars, in the establishment of signature stations; and verify, through its election registrars, the signatures on the basis of the list of voters,” Abalos said.

He said the Comelec’s actions would “speed up the work” if ever the petition would be entertained.

[BBKuya Germs]

Comelec to junk people’s initiative on Charter change--exec
50 solons sign resolution vs Senate-House vote

First posted 11:51am (Mla time) Mar 28, 2006
By TJ Burgonio, Maila Ager
Inquirer, INQ7.net

THE COMMISSION on Elections (Comelec) will dismiss any petition for constitutional amendments via a people's initiative in the absence of an enabling law supporting such an exercise, a poll official said.

“As soon as a petition is filed, we have no recourse but to dismiss the petition. There's no implementing law,” Comelec Commissioner Romeo Brawner said during his confirmation hearing at the Commission on Appointments.

Brawner said he hoped the Supreme Court could resolve the issue “once and for all.”

Brawner’s position differed from that of Comelec chairman Benjamin Abalos who said on Monday that the commission was prepared to verify the signatures that administration supporters claimed to have collected during a signature campaign to push for Charter change.

At the House of Representatives, the opposition is set to file on Wednesday a resolution that will require the House and the Senate to vote separately on the issue of Charter change, Minority Floor Leader Francis Escudero said.

At the same time, Escudero released on Tuesday the names of 50 legislators who crossed party lines to sign the measure.

Sixteen members from the majority bloc signed the resolution: Liberal Party (LP) members Benigno Aquino III, of Tarlac, Nerius Acosta of Bukidnon, Lorenzo Tañada III of Quezon, Hermilando Mandanas of Batangas, Henedina Abad of Batanes, Rozzano Rufino Biazon of Muntinlupa, Joseph Emilio Abaya of Cavite, Proceso Alcala of Quezon, Rodolfo Bacani of Manila, Manuel Mamba of Cagayan, and Alfonso Umali Jr. of Oriental Mindoro;

Las Piñas Representative Cynthia Villar, Cavite Representative Jesus Crispin Remulla of the Nacionalista Party, Pasig Representative Robert Jaworski Jr., Cebu Representative Clavel Martinez, and Catanduanes Representative Joseph Santiago.

The remaining 34 belong to the opposition bloc: Escudero, Cavite Representative Gilbert Remulla, Darlene Antonino-Custodio of South Cotabato, Joel Villanueva of CIBAC, Agapito Aquino of Makati, Teofisto Guingona III of Bukidnon, Ronaldo Zamora of San Juan, Roilo Golez of Parañaque, Rodolfo Plaza of Agusan del Sur, Alan Peter Cayetano of Taguig-Pateros, and Mujiv Hataman of Anak Mindanao;

Imee Marcos of Ilocos Norte, Rolex Suplico of Iloilo, Benjamin Agarao Jr. and Justin Chipeco of Laguna, Juan Edgardo Angara of Aurora, Juan Ponce Enrile Jr. of Cagayan, Baesendig Dilangalen of Maguindanao, Vincent Crisologo of Quezon City, Ruy Elias Lopez of Davao, Luis Asistio and Oscar Malapitan of Caloocan, Antonio Serapio of Valenzuela, and Florencio Noel of An Waray;

Bayan Muna Representatives Satur Ocampo, Teodoro Casiño, and Joel Virador; Anakpawis Representatives Crispin Beltran and Rafael Mariano; Liza Maza of Gabriela, Akbayan Representatives Loretta Ann Rosales, Ana Theresia Hontiveros-Baraquel, and Mario Aguja; and Partido ng Manggagawa Representative Renato Magtubo.

Escudero said two more legislators, including Zamboanga Representative Erico Fabian, would sign the resolution that would be filed Wednesday.

Negros Oriental Representative Jacinto Paras, a staunch supporter of the Charter change initiative, is the only opposition member who will not sign the resolution, Escudero said.

“Contrary to the claim of the majority that we cannot gather 50 signatures to prevent their plan to amend the Constitution through Congress voting as one, we have now the number and it would go higher than 50 tomorrow to make sure that this will not happen,” Escudero said.

He said the passage of the resolution would mean that no amendment in the Constitution could be done by a simple joint voting of the House and the Senate.

The resolution pointed out that even in changing the names of streets and highways, voting was done separately by the House and the Senate.

“More so in the case of the supreme exercise of amending or revising the Constitution, including the appropriation of funds,” it said.

Escudero reiterated that the move was not meant to block the Charter change initiative, as this only wanted to ensure that the rule of law would be observed.

He said the passage of the resolution would not mean the Charter change initiative would be junked permanently.

“It does not because there's a pending resolution before the Senate, a concurrent resolution asking that Congress convene and sit as a constituent assembly,” he said.

“But the House and the Senate must vote separately and not as one,” Escudero stressed.

[mArGe]

Naku! La wenta CHACHA! mag sayawan nlng cla.. panget PARLAMENTARY... Prime Minister.... ewww..

[BBKuya Germs]

Cguro kapag Parliamentary na, mas kokonti na lang nakakapunta ng Boracay. Of course, territory yan ng Western Visayas Region, pundo nila ang makukuha mula sa tourists (local and foreign). Same thing sa Baguio. At mamahal na rin ang vegetables and fruit na mostly from Cordellera Adm. Region. Seguro, every boundary ng every region may toll way or kailangan na rin ng papers (like VISA) bago makapasok sa territory nila. Magkakaroon na ng kanya-kayang metropolis dahil tataas ang tax sa NCR. In short, maggugulangan ang every region. Kawawa yung Regions na walang resources. I dunno kung tama ang iniisip ko. hehe Exagerated ba?

[BBKuya Germs]

Since ang mga representatives/congressmen loyal sa Partido kesa sa mga mamamayan/distrito nila, ang mahahalal ng Prime Minister ay yung may pera.

Kung dati, million (voters) ang binibili nilang boto pra manalo, sa parliamentary hundred (representatives/congressmen) na lang.

[Neil TG]

NOT JUST YET!

[ann]

i think shifting to parliamentary form of government is not just necessary but timely. first, it's been 100 years since the present form was implemented, and the aging of the current form of government would not afford us to effect the necessary development. second, the parliamentary form of government will fix all our institutions, a whole new face, whole new expectations. third, since the executive and legislative branches of government will already be merged, less gridlock. better for projects that should require immediate funding. problem with the presidential, when there are projects conceptualized by the executive departments even so much thought of, the congress would always block the funding by not giving enough approrpiations to these departments. the parliamentary form will resolve the problem because the project proponents will be the same to give the funding. there are lots of unfunded projects in the government which are very good but because of politics, were deprived of funds. fourth, the parliamentary government will give importance to technocrats. departments or ministries will be rationalized in such a way that those non-functional offices or bureaus will be abolished. fifth, the duality of government will provide a demarcration between politicos and statesmen. politicos will vie for the ceremonial post of president; the intelligent statemen's arena will be the parliament.

i think the change is timely. there is no harm in making a shift especially if the old form has been proven to be ineffective anymore. moreover, some provisions in our present constitution are already obsolete, means applicable pa nung time nila aguinaldo..why, even the American Government conssistently effects ammendments to their charter to suit the current needs?