MANILA — A law professor on Thursday asked the Supreme Court (SC) to clear things over conflicting positions of the House of Representatives, the Senate and other stakeholders in connection with measures to amend the 1987 Constitution to pave the way for a federal form of government.
In an 11-page petition for declaratory relief, petitioner Arturo de Castro asked the high court to answer the question on whether the votes of the Senate and the House of Representatives should be counted separately or jointly to determine the three-fourth majority.
He also cited the conflicting opinions expressed by legal luminaries in the interpretation of Section 1 (1), Article XVII of the 1987 Constitution on Amendments or Revisions.
“The Supreme Court, as the final arbiter of constitutional questions is called upon to resolve the constitutional issue of whether the House of Representatives alone may propose amendments to the Constitution,” he said.
“A final and definitive resolution of the constitutional questions …would diffuse the tension in the nation that would go a long way to keep and maintain stability in the political system in the Philippines,” the petitioner added.
De Castro maintained that the people should “not be denied their sovereign right to consider federalism just because the Senate refuses to cooperate.”
He called it “a clear dereliction of duty” for which the senators are accountable to the people in the next elections.
“If the voting should be counted separately, then the House alone may not proceed to propose revisions to the Constitution without the participation of the Senate,” De Castro said.
“Unless the issue is resolved soon, an impending constitutional crisis looms in the horizon that may lead to another People Power revolution and the establishment of a revolutionary government supported by the people,” De Castro said.
He told the high court that “a final and definitive resolution of the constitutional question raised would diffuse tension in the nation that would go a long way to keep and maintain stability in the political system in the Philippines.”
De Castro is a professor of Law and Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) lecturer, Dean of the College of Criminology and Associate Law Dean and Bar Review Director of the University of Manila.
He named the Senate as represented by Senate President Aquilino Pimentel Jr., House of Representatives as represented by House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, and the Office of the President as represented by executive undersecretary Jesus Melchor Quitain as respondents.
This is the first petition filed at the SC regarding the Congress’ move to amend the Charter.
The petition stemmed from the Senate’s refusal to heed the call of the House of Representatives for a Joint Constituent Assembly to propose revision of the Constitution to shift from unitary to federal system of government.
As a result, the House of Representatives decided to go ahead with the proceedings to propose revisions to the Constitution even without the participation of the Senate, and to draft a revised Constitution to be submitted to the people in a plebiscite.
It may be recalled that the Senate and the House of Representatives have been at odds over the issue of Charter change to usher in a federal form of government.
While the House wants to convene a joint constitutional assembly to propose amendments to the Constitution, the Senate wants a separate voting on the amendments. (Christopher Lloyd Caliwan/PNA)
