THROUGH UNTRUE
In 2006, the Supreme Court trashed a petition to change the Philippine Constitution through a “people’s initiative.” The court described the petition as “constitutionally infirm, propelled by deceptively gathered signatures.” In effect, the Supreme Court did not believe that the move to amend the Constitution came from the people exercising their freedom of expression.
In a democracy, the freedom to express one’s opinions is a fundamental right and a cornerstone of civic engagement and political discourse. Exercising this freedom serves as a mechanism for holding government officials accountable, promoting transparency, and providing valuable feedback so the government can enact laws and policies that reflect the people's interests.
The Supreme Court's skepticism regarding the authenticity of the people's initiative might have stemmed from their perception that Filipinos have generally grown reluctant to engage in political discourse or express opinions on matters of governance. Such reluctance raised questions about the people's active participation in a signature campaign to amend the Constitution.
Such a perception is still valid today. Many people are indifferent and apathetic toward political issues played up by the media. Very few stage street protests or mass actions to force the government to act on their grievances. The disenchantment with the collective efforts to bring about change has grown due to many instances where protests failed to yield tangible results. The initial fervor behind them dissipated without sustainable progress. When people’s best intentions and actions seem futile, they tend to hide under the cloak of indifference and cynicism to avoid further disappointment and frustration.
It is noticeable too that most young people seldom bother themselves with political issues, convinced that their voices cannot produce meaningful change in a system where power is consolidated in the hands of a privileged few. They prioritize their immediate needs and aspirations over broader communal concerns. This cynicism and sense of resignation contribute to their passive acceptance of the status quo.
The internet and the proliferation of social media platforms also contribute to the increasing apathy of people to express any initiative towards change. While the internet makes it easy for us to express our opinions or support causes through hashtags, shares, and likes, these digital ways of communication seldom lead to a unified and collective voice about a particular issue. These outlets often cultivate superficial engagement, where participation is reduced to a click of a button rather than sustained, meaningful involvement.
In social media, even the most intelligent and lucid opinions fade away and are buried under misinformation, manipulation, online harassment and algorithmic filtering. Prominent bloggers and influencers refrain from commenting on political issues lest they be censored, cancelled, and red-tagged. The targeting of activists and journalists tempts them to stop voicing their opinions to avoid reprisals.
It is, therefore, unlikely that, during these highly polarized times when people have grown weary of traditional political processes and institutions, a real people’s initiative will arise without the urgings of influential personalities with vested interests.
Perhaps we can learn from our experience of the “People Power” revolution. As an exemplary model of an authentic people’s initiative, it expressed our collective energy and commitment to challenge existing structures and advocate for positive political and social transformation. Sadly, what was once hailed as the Filipino’s shining moment is now being unfairly reduced to a trivial occurrence.