Seven lawmakers voted “no” to House Bill (HB) No. 7352, or the accompanying measure that would implement the Resolution of Both Houses No. 6 (RBH 6) to call for a Constitutional Convention (Con-con) to amend the 1987 Constitution.

With an overwhelming vote of 301, what pushed these seven lawmakers to vote “no” to a legislation that has the approval of House Speaker Martin Romualdez and senior members of the House of Representatives?

Three members of the progressive Makabayan bloc—Reps. Arlene Brosas of Gabriela Women’s Party, France Castro of ACT Teachers Party-list, and Raoul Manuel of Kabataan Party-list—along with Reps. Edcel Lagman of Albay 1st District, Gabriel Bordado of Camarines Sur 3rd District, and Mujiv Hataman of Basilan Lone District  opposed HB 7352.

Informed sources said Davao City 1st District Rep. Paolo Duterte was the 7th lawmaker who also voted “no.”

In explaining his “no” vote, Hataman chided the Senate for not taking action on RBH 6, saying that the “The Constitutional Convention Act” remains pending in the Senate.

“Why are we attempting to pass an implementing law for RBH 6 when, as it is right now, it is not yet ‘implementable,’ so to speak, because it still lacks Senate approval?,” he asked

He questioned why Congress was in a rush to approve the implementing law when it makes no sense to do so because the Senate has to first take its action on the RBH 6.

Lagman, a legal luminary, also seconded Hataman’s position on HB 7352.

“No less than the Chairman of the sponsoring Committee on Constitutional Amendments admitted in plenary session that Resolution of Both Houses No. 6 is not yet complete, effective and implementable pending its approval by the Senate,” he said.

The approval of the Con-con Act, the lawmaker added, “is patently precipitate and premature as there is nothing yet to be implemented.”

“Moreover, the House of Representatives’ consideration and approval of HB No. 7352 is an exercise in inordinate futility because no less than the Senate President disclosed that the Senate cannot muster the extraordinary requisite vote to join the House in calling for charter change via a constitutional convention,” Lagman explained.

He was referring to Senate President Juan Miguel Zubiri’s earlier statement saying that it is useless for lawmakers to tackle Charter Change (Cha-cha) at this time because there would be no vote for it in his chamber.

The solon also cited how the sponsors of RBH 6 admitted that the agenda of the Con-con Act cannot be controlled by Congress, which opens the doors for amendments on the political provisions—term limits—of the new Constitution.

“This could be the clandestine agenda which the people feared when they invariably opposed Cha-cha before and until now,” he said.

Lagman raised concerns about how the country can put up a “self-reliant and independent economy effectively controlled by Filipinos” if the new Constitution would allow 100 percent foreign investments.

For his part, Duterte said the immediate approval of the bill was untimely, citing the "more pressing social and economic issues" in the country, such as inflation and poverty that need be addressed.

"Billions to be allocated for a Constitutional Convention could be allocated instead to other programs intended to improve the living conditions of thousands of Filipino families," he said.

Makabayan solons Brosas and Castro also warned about how “history is repeating itself” because President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.’s father, the former dictator, also used constitutional amendments to pave the way for the 20-year dictatorship that plunged the country economically.

“Idinaos ang 1971 Con-con, nagdeklara ng batas-militar noong 1972, ipinahuli ang mga oposisyon na delegado sa Con-con para tiyakin ang pagluluwal ng 1973 Constitution na pabor sa unlimited na termino ni Marcos Sr (The 1971 Con-con was conducted, martial law was declared in 1972, the opposition who were delegates to the Con-con were arrested to ensure the birth of the 1973 Constitution that favor the unlimited term of Marcos Sr),” Brosas wrote in her explanation of her “no” vote.

“In truth, overhauling the post-EDSA Constitution is part and parcel of the Marcosian grand design to overturn the course of history and roll back the supreme gains of the democratic EDSA uprising,” she said, as she questioned reports that the chief executive had nothing to do with Congress’ push for Con-con.

Castro also made the same warning, addressing the House Speaker and her colleagues, of how the 1973 Constitution gave way to the dictatorship and “crony capitalism.”

She said that the learning crisis, low wages, high inflation, tax increases, unemployment, and the widening gap between households would be worsened by Charter Change.