A Philippine Constitution Association (Philconsa) official asked Filipinos on Thursday, Jan. 26 to view with "good intentions" the proposals in the House of Representatives to amend the 1987 Charter.
"We must also give good intentions, or give the benefit of the doubt to good intentions," said Philconsa Vice President for Luzon, lawyer Dionisio Donato Garciano.
"We must give this committee the benefit of the doubt in proposing amendments to the 1987 Constitution. This initiative is made with good intentions," he added.
Garciano was among the legal luminaries and resource persons who took part Thursday in the House Committee on Constitutional Amendments' first formal hearing on bills seeking to amend the existing Constitution in the current 19th Congress.
The panel is chaired by Cagayan de Oro 2nd district Rep. Rufus Rodriguez.
The Philconsa official added: "We should do away with notions of paranoia that this is being made to perpetrate certain people in power, extensions and term limits, advantages or taking advantage of the form of government."
"This is not the way to start. Paranoia or bad faith is not the way to start in proposing amendments to the fundamental law, Mr. Chairman, which is the basis of all legislation," he noted.
Charter Change or Cha-cha has been a recurring endeavor in the House of Representatives for years.
"The Constitution is fundamental. It is a fundamental law. Legislation coming out from Congress which start from the House of Representatives or with the Senate of the Philippines would alway cater to the fact that legislation should be based on the fundamental law. Because if there is a defect on the fundamental law, there would be a defect in legislation. And eventually, there would be serious problems in execution," explained Garciano.
RELATED STORY:
https://mb.com.ph/2023/01/25/house-panel-begins-cha-cha-deliberations-thursday/
He then suggested that the House members first determine the basic description of the Constitution before they could potentially work to amend it.
"This committee must also determine as to whether or not the Constitution is a living organism or is a strictly legal document.
"Because if it's a living organism, then the Constitution may be written broadly. But if it's a strictly legal document, then the Constitution must be written in a concise manner, complete, and correct," said Garciano.