Ateneo law professor backs Padilla: 'Amending the 1987 Constitution will benefit future generations'
Amending the relevant provisions of the 1987 Constitution is for the benefit not just of present citizens now but of the future generations of Filipinos.
Thus, ensuring the 1987 Constitution does not hold back the Philippines' economic growth - especially for the long term - should be the priority especially of lawmakers.
This was pointed out by Sen. Robinhood C. Padilla, quoting a radio interview of lawyer and Ateneo de Manila Law School Professor Antonio Abad Jr.
“Reforming the Constitution should be our top priority because it is the highest law of the land. If you are a leader, if you are a senator, this should be your priority. This is where our next meal - rice, viand, onions - will come from," Abad said.
Abad voiced his support for Padilla's Resolution of Both Houses No. 3, which seeks to amend some economic provisions in the Charter through a Constituent Assembly (Con Ass), with both Houses of Congress voting separately.
“I support Padilla's resolution along with similar efforts in the House of Representatives. We must fix the holes in our Constitution. Padilla is right - our economic provisions are too tight, so we are left behind our Southeast Asian neighbors in terms of economic development)," he explained.
“The Constitution is not just for politicians. All Filipinos have a stake in this, we are all stakeholders in our Constitution," he added.
Responding to claims that amending the economic provisions of the Constitution would not be needed due to laws like the Public Service Act, Abad noted that while the Public Service Act may have generated investments in various sectors, there is still a need to ensure the Constitution allows economic growth for the future generations.
‘’This Constitution should be for future generations - you want a Constitution to last the next 100, 1,000 years. So we should fix the Constitution now, for the sake of our future generations," he said, adding that rules on investments should be in laws and not the Constitution.
He noted that while the Philippine Constitution has a 60-40 restriction on foreign investments, our Southeast Asian neighbors like Myanmar, which have gained much foreign investments, have no such restrictions.
‘'If prospective investors see that our Constitution has a provision restricting their investment, they would go elsewhere like Vietnam," he added.