No to CON-ASS

‘No to Cha-Cha, No to Gloria’
Left, right, and center join to denounce her bid to extend stay

BY ASHZEL HACHERO and JP LOPEZ

A CROSS-SECTION of society showed up yesterday in Makati City’s business financial district to show their opposition to moves of President Arroyo’s allies to extend her hold on power by amending the Constitution.

Organizers said the rally gathered up to 15,000 participants, including members of militant, student, and Church groups, and political figures. But the police said the crowd to have peaked at only 6,000.

The crowd during the 5 to 8 p.m. rally at Paseo de Roxas and Ayala avenues was bigger than the anti-Cha-cha rally held last December also in Makati, which organizers said had some 10,000 participants.

Towards the end of the rally, actress Bibeth Orteza read a "people’s resolution" denouncing House Resolution 1109, and called for a viva voce vote among the participants.

HR 1109 was passed by Arroyo’s allies last week without Senate participation. It calls on Congress to convene into a constituent assembly to amend the Constitution.

They protesters brought effigies and streamers and banners saying "No to Cha-Cha, No to Gloria Forever."

The protesters started converging toward the rally site at about 4 p.m., under a shower of confetti from buildings on Ayala ave.

Rally organizers set up a stage where speakers took turns assailing the administration-led efforts to amend the Charter, which they said would eventually pave the way for the extension of the term of President Arroyo and other elected public officials.

Makati Mayor and United Opposition president Jejomar Binay said yesterday’s rally was just a prelude to much larger protests in the coming days.

"Kailangang ipakita natin sa rehimeng Arroyo na hindi tayo papayag na ameyandahan at salaulahin an gating Konstitusyon dahil sa kanilang mga pansariling interes," he said.

Former Palace ally Rep. Jose de Venecia Jr. said Arroyo is intent on staying beyond her term.

Rally speakers said amendments to the Constitution could not be trusted in the hands of 117 "irresponsible" congressmen who approved, "like a thief in the night," House Resolution 1109 convening Congress into a constituent assembly.

The faces of the 177 congressmen were flashed on three wide screens at the stage.

During an interfaith rally that preceded the protest action, Bishop Solito Toquero of the National Council of Churches in the Philippines said it has been the position of their group that now this is not the proper time to amend the Constitution.

"Hindi po tayo sigurado sa mga kasalukuyang nakaupo sa Kongreso na nag-apruba ng House Resolutiom 1109. Di po tayo sigurado sa mga iresponsableng nakaupo ngayon," he told the cheering crowd.

Sr. John Mananzan of the Association of Major Religious Superiors of the Philippines said: "Tinatawagan ko ang mga babaylan at mga anito! Isinusumpa natin ang kawalanghiyaan at katiwalian ng administrasyong ito!"

Bayan chair Carol Araullo said "this unity among various groups and personalities has been caused by the very real threat of having Arroyo stay in power. It is somehow to the credit of Mrs. Arroyo and her cohorts that the nation urgently comes together in protest," she said.

Senators Francis Escudero, Loren Legarda, Mar Roxas, Richard Gordon and Maria Ana Consuelo Madrigal were given 30 seconds each to speak.

Other senators seen in the rally were Panfilo Lacson, Rodolfo Biazon, Benigno Aquino III and Pia Cayetano.

"Malacañang’s spokespersons have taken turns in defending the President, insisting that Mrs. Arroyo had no knowledge or blessing of the plot to force Con-Ass in the House. And yet she has not done anything to rein in her allies in Congress from pursuing their political adventurism," she said.

Among other personalities who attended the rally were f Jun Lozada, Pampanga Gov. Ed Panlilio, Sen. Franklin Drilon, Bayan Muna party list Rep. Satur Ocampo, Liza Maza of Gabriela, Teddy Casiño of Bayan Muna, Rafael Mariano of Anak-Pawis, former Rep. Nereus Acosta, former Vice President Toefisto Guingona and his son, Bukidnon Rep. TJ Guingona, former Philippine Tourism Authority chief Nixon Kua, Fernando Poe’s daughter Grace Poe Llamanzares, Armida Siguion-Reyna, Caloocan Bishop Deogracias Iñiguez, former Trade secretary Cesar Purisima, former Education secretary Florencio Abad, Gina de Venecia, Leah Navarro, Vicente Romano, former Social Welfare secretary Corazon Soliman, former Tourism secretary Narzalina Lim, and former DOTC undersecretary Josefina Lichauco.

Among participating groups were the rightist military group Rebolusyonaryong Alyansang Makabayan; leftist militants Bagong Alyansang Makabayan, Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas, and Anakbayan; Former Senior Government Officials (FSGO), Alliance of Progressive Labor, Task Force Detainees of the Philippines , Pwersa ng Masang Pilipino, Union of the Masses for Democracy and Justice, Akbayan and many others.

The United Opposition (UNO), Filipinos for Peace, Justice and Progress Movement (FPJPM), Nationalista Party, Concerned Citizens’ Movement, Black and White Movement, Stop Cha-cha Coalition, Sanlakas, Liberal Party, AMRSP and other religious groups, Kilusang Makabansang Ekonomiya, and Bangon Pilipinas led by Jesus is Lord leader Brother Eddie Villanueva also attended the rally.

Bayan secretary general Renato Reyes said similar mass actions were held in Baguio, Calamba City, Lucena City, Batangas City, Nasugbu, Bacoor, Dasmarinas and Silang Cavite, Antipolo City, Cebu City, Tagbilaran City, Sorsogon, Naga, Legazpi, Davao City, Bacolod, Iloilo, General Santos City, Iligan, Cagayan de Oro City, Cabadbaran in Agusan del Norte, Agusan del Sur and Surigao City. MALAYA

How the Charter was violated 36 times in the MOA AD

The Supreme Court ruling should be included in the latest impeachment complaint against de facto President Gloria Arroyo.

How the Charter was violated 36 times in the MOA AD

BY AMADO P. MACASAET

THE Supreme Court vote was a tenuous 8-7 against the MOA AD. If one looked at the 36 violations of the Constitution seen by Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, one would have expected a unanimous ruling.

The seven dissenters led by Associate Justice Dante Tinga never saw it Carpio’s way. Yet the presumption is they did their job of opposing the majority ruling in defense of the Constitution, which as everyone knows is also in defense of President Arroyo’s propensity to violate the Fundamental Law.

The Supreme Court is almost always split over an issue. But when it becomes obvious that a ruling leaves the independence of the magistrates in doubt, democracy dies a bit. This was most clearly manifested in the 9-6 ruling in favor of the grant of executive privilege to the President.

The Court practically put on ice the controversial ZTE-broadband deal with that ruling. The Court prevented the President’s men, notably Romulo Neri, from telling the Senate the truth of what he knew.

In a separate concurring opinion on the MOA AD case, Carpio listed the 36 violations of the Constitution. If the Court had ruled in favor of the MOA-AD, the Constitution might not be worth the value of the paper it is written on.

The 36 violations of the Charter, listed by Carpio in his separate concurring opinion, are:

• Article 1 on the National Territory. During the oral arguments, Atty. Sedfrey Candelaria, principal counsel of the GRP panel, stated that this provision would have to be amended to conform to the MOA-AD.

• Section 3, Article II on the role of the Armed Forces of the Philippines as "protector of the people and the state." Under the MOA AD, the AFP’s role is only to defend the BJE (Bangsamoro Judicial Entity) against external aggression.

• Article III on the Bill of Rights. The MOA AD does not state that the Bill of Rights will apply to the BJE. The MOA AD refers only to the "internationally recognized human rights instruments" such as the United Nations Universal Declaration on Human Rights, International Humanitarian Law, and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. No reference is made to the Bill of Rights or even to the Constitution.

• Section 1, Article VI on the Legislative Department. Legislative power shall no longer be vested solely in the Congress of the Philippines. Under the MOA-AD, the BJE shall "build, develop and maintain its own institutions" like a legislature whose laws are not subordinate to laws passed by Congress.

• Section 1, Article VII on executive power. Executive power shall no longer be vested exclusively in the President of the Philippines. The BJE shall have its own Chief Executive who will not be under the supervision of the President.

• Section 16, Article VII on the President’s power to appoint certain officials, including military officers from the rank of colonel or naval captain, with the consent of the Commission on Appointments. All public officials in the BJE, including military officers of any rank in the BJE internal security force, will be appointed in accordance with the BJE’s own basic law or constitution.

• Section 17, Article VII on the President’s control over all executive departments. The President will not control executive bureaus or offices in the BJE, like foreign trade missions of the BJE.

• Section 18, Article VII on the President as "Commander-in-Chief of all armed forces of the Philippines." Under the MOA-AD, the President will not be the Commander-in-Chief of the BJE’s internal security force. The BJE’s internal security force will not be part of the AFP chain of command.

• Section 21, Article VII on the ratification of treaties and international agreements by the Senate. This will not apply to the BJE which, under the MOA-AD, has the power to enter into economic and trade treaties with other countries.

• Section 1, Article VIII on judicial power being vested in one Supreme Court. Since the BJE will have "its own x x x judicial system," the BJE will also have its own Supreme Court.

• Section 2, Article VIII on the power of Congress to define and apportion the jurisdiction of lower courts. Under the MOA-AD, Congress cannot prescribe the jurisdiction of BJE courts.

• Section 5(2), Article VIII on the power of the Supreme Court to review decisions of lower courts and to promulgate rules of pleadings and practice in all courts. Under the MOA-AD, the BJE will have its own judicial system. Decisions of BJE courts are not reviewable by the Supreme Court.

• Section 5(6), Article VII on the power of the Supreme Court to appoint all officials and employees to the Judiciary. This power will not apply to courts in the BJE.

• Section 6, Article VIII on the Supreme Court’s administrative supervision over all courts and their personnel. Under the MOA-AD, the Supreme Court will not exercise administrative supervision over BJE courts and their personnel.

• Section 9, Article VIII on the appointment by the President of all judges in the Judiciary from nominees recommended by the Judicial and Bar Council. This provision will not apply to courts in the BJE.

• Section 11, Article VIII on the power of the Supreme Court to discipline judges of all lower courts. This power will not apply to judges in the BJE.

• Section 1(1), Article IX-B on the power of the Civil Service Commission to administer the civil service. Under the MOA-AD, the BJE will have "its own x x x civil service." The Civil Service Commission will have no jurisdiction over the BJE’s Civil Service.

• Section 2(1), Article IX-C on the power of the Commission on Elections to enforce and administer all election laws. Under the MOA-AD, the BJE will have "its own x x x electoral system" The Commission on Elections will have no jurisdiction over the BJE’s electoral system.

• Section 2(1), Article IX-D on the power of the Commission on Audit to examine and audit all subdivisions, agencies, and instrumentalities of the Government. Under the MOA-AD, the BJE can "build, develop and maintain its own institutions" without limit. The BJE can create its own audit authority. The Commission on Audit will have no jurisdiction over the BJE or its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities.

• Section1, Article X on the political subdivisions of the Philippines. A new political subdivision for the BJE will have to be created.

• Section 4, Article X on the power of the President to exercise general supervision over all local governments. Under the MOA-AD, this provision will not apply to the BJE.

• Section 5, Article X subjecting the taxing power of local governments to limitations prescribed by Congress. Under the MOA-AD, the BJE shall have "its own x x x legislation." The BJE’s taxing power will not be subject to limitations imposed by national law.

• Section 6, Article X on the "just share" of local government units in national taxes. Since the BJE is in reality independent from the national government, this provision will have to be revised to reflect the independent status of the BJE and its component cities, municipalities and barangays vis-à-vis other local government units.

• Section 10, Article X on the alteration of boundaries of local government units, which requires a plebiscite "in the political units affected." Under paragraph 2(d) on Territory of the MOA-AD, the plebiscite is only in the barangays and municipalities identified as expansion areas of the BJE. There will be no plebiscite "in the political units affected," which should include all the barangays within a city, and all municipalities within a province.

· Section 15, Article X on the creation of autonomous regions within the framework of the Constitution, national sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Philippines. This will have to be revised since under the MOA-AD the BJE has all the attributes of a state.

· Section 16, Article X on the President’s power to exercise general supervision over autonomous regions. This provision will not apply to the BJE, which is totally independent from the President’s supervision.

• Section 17, Article X which vests in the National Government residual powers, or those powers which are not granted by the Constitution or laws to autonomous regions. This will not apply to the BJE.

• Section 18, Article X which requires that personal, family and property laws of autonomous regions shall be consistent with the Constitution and national laws. This will not apply to the BJE which will have its own basic law or constitution.

• Section 20, Article X on the legislative powers of the autonomous regional assemblies whose laws are subject to the Constitution and national laws. This provision will not apply to the BJE.

• Section 21, Article X on the preservation of peace and order within autonomous regions by the local police as provided in national laws. Under the MOA-AD, the BJE shall have "its own x x x police" to preserve peace and order within the BJE.

• Section 2, Article XII on State ownership of all lands of the public domain and of all natural resources of the Philippines. Under paragraph 3 on Concepts and Principles of the MOA-AD, ancestral domain, which consists of ancestral lands and the natural resources in such lands, does not form part of the public domain. The ancestral domain of the Bangsamoro refers to land they or their ancestors continuously possessed since time immemorial, excluding the period that their possession was disrupted by conquest, war, civil disturbance, force majeure, other forms of usurpation or displacement by force, deceit or stealth, or as a consequence of government project, or any voluntary dealings by the government and private parties. Under paragraph 1 on Concepts and Principles of the MOA-AD, the Bangsamoro people are the Moros and all indigenous peoples of Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan. Thus, the ancestral domain of the Bangsamoro refers to the lands that all the peoples in Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan possessed before the arrival of the Spaniards in 1521. In short, the ancestral domain of the Bangsamoro refers to the entire Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan. This negates the Regalian doctrine in the 1935, 1973 and 1987 Constitutions.

• Section 9. Article XII on the establishment of an independent economic and planning agency headed by the President. This agency is the National Economic and Development Authority. Under the MOA-AD, the BJE will have its own economic planning agency.

• Section 20, Article XII on the establishment of an independent monetary authority, now the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas. Under the MOA-AD, the BJE will have its own financial and banking authority.

• Section 4, Article XVI on the maintenance of "a regular force necessary for the security of the State." This provision means there shall only be one "Armed Forces of the Philippines" under the command and control of the President. This provision will not apply to the BJE since under the MOA-AD, the BJE shall have "its own x x x internal security force" which will not be under the command and control of the President.

• Section 5(6), Article XVI on the composition of the armed forces, whose officers and men must be recruited proportionately from all provinces and cities as far as practicable. This will not apply to the BJE’s internal security force whose personnel will come only from BJE areas.

• Section 6, Article XVI on the establishment of one police force which shall be national in scope under the administration and control of a national police commission. The BJE will have "its own x x x police" which is a regional police force not administered or controlled by the National Police Commission.

How the seven dissenting jurists interpreted the Constitution another way and failed to see these violations will be long remembered as one of the more malignant signs that have placed in doubt the independence of the Supreme Court.

The swing vote of Associate Justice Leonardo Quisumbing carried the day for the majority.

The concurrence of Quisumbing does not matter half as much as the fact that there are seven justices who supported the MOA AD. If the voting had gone the other way, the suspicion that the Court is losing its independence to the Executive Branch would have gained credibility.

The tenuous majority of one says a lot about the independence of the Court but the magistrates can always hide and protect themselves by claiming that dissension is part of due process.

As in all cases, rulings boil down to numbers. The majority wins. How long they can rule independently as in the 8-7 vote on the MOA AD is an omen. MALAYA

Charter change clause in MOA ‘unconstitutional’-SC justice

Charter change clause in MOA ‘unconstitutional’-SC justice

MANILA, Philippines – (UPDATE 4) A provision in the memorandum of agreement on ancestral domain between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front that seeks to amend the Constitution to conform with the MOA makes it unconstitutional, a Supreme Court justice said Friday.
Responding to the argument by Dean Pacifico Agabin, lawyer for Senator Manuel “Mar” Roxas, one of the intervenors, that the executive could not commit to the MILF the amendment of the Constitution to conform with the agreement, Justice Antonio Carpio asked: “There is that clause under the MOA, correct?”
“Yes,” said Agabin during Friday’s oral arguments atthe Supreme Court that is trying to determine the constitutionality of the MOA-AD.
“Then the MOA is unconstitutional on that ground,” said Carpio who also cited a television interview by an MILF leader who said that the Constitution needed to be amended to conform with the MOA.
Carpio said the MILF wanted this provision to be included in the MOA because “the MILF did not want to be bound by our Constitution.” Inquirer

Blood in Gloria Arroyo’s hands

U.S. Supreme Court finds individual right to own guns

Senators revive call on Gloria to resign

The Philippines’ political and religious leaders want unpopular leader Gloria Arroyo’s corrupt practices to end. The majority of the Filipino people want her ousted. We are just waiting for the knock-out punch, impeachment or extra constitutional means. Most likely a combination of people and military power will finish her off. Only time can tell. I think the GMA loyalist generals won’t fight until the last mans standing. They are political generals without followers. Gloria is lucky if she can survive politically in the current payola scandal.

Senators revive call on Gloria to resign
BY JP LOPEZ
SENATORS yesterday renewed demands for President Arroyo to resign, saying her "misgovernance" is pushing the country to the brink of political upheaval.
"President Arroyo should resign and turn over the government to Vice President de Castro as caretaker until 2010," Senate minority leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. said.
Majority leader Francis Pangilinan said Arroyo’s resignation is the only constitutional solution to avert civil war. Malaya
Related Links
Take the money and oust her
Palace misused charity funds, gave loans sans records - COA
Gifts are free? For those in gov’t, not necessarily

Novaliches Bishop Calls On Military To Defend, Protect Charter

The House of Representatives’ scrapping of Arroyo-DE Venecia fraudulent Constituent Assembly to revise the 1987 Philippine Constitution is considered as a “ceremonial act of surrender” since it’s already rejected by majority of the Filipino people. The House resolution no. 1450 is piece of SCRAP paper and its sub-product SHIT. It’s done hastily, undemocratic, unlawful and unconstitutional. The perfect political storm is growing stronger by the day until the ouster of corrupt and abusive Gloria Arroyo regime. Military intervention is the right thing to do at this point in time. The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) has a constitutional mandate as the protector of the people and the State. Gloria Arroyo is a total failure. It’s about time for a change.

Day of reckoning


Tobias urges duty-bound soldiers to support mass actions

Bishop calls on military to defend, protect Charter

By Marie A. Surbano

Daily Tribune 12/12/2006

A bishop started the political-moral ball rolling as he flung the first challenge to the Philippine soldiery to defend the Constitution that he said is today under attack by the Arroyo government.

Novaliches Bishop Antonio Tobias, an outspoken senior bishop-critic of President Arroyo and her administration, yesterday openly called on the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) to perform its bounden duty to defend the Constitution and protect the Filipino people from the machinations of Mrs. Arroyo and her allies in the House of Representatives in their multiple immoral plots to amend the Charter and thereby ensure that their selfish vested interests would be protected.

“The soldiers, the Armed Forces, are sworn to protect the people and to defend the Constitution,” the bishop said, justifying his call as legal and constitutional, stressing that “Today, the Constitution is being ravaged in the interest of private individuals. We should be dependent on this (constitutional duty of the AFP to correct this wrong) and I ask them (military) to help the people,” the Novaliches bishop told reporters during a press briefing yesterday

after the Mass held at the St. Peter’s Parish in Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City.

Tobias, a known critic of the Arroyo government, pointed out that the soldiers are constitutionally sworn to protect the Charter and therefore, as it is now under attack, they should now show that support to the mass actions being organized by no less than the majority of the Filipinos who oppose Charter change (Cha-cha).

It is the same constitutional proviso that then Vice President Arroyo and her elite group that grabbed power from then sitting President Joseph Estrada in January 2001, used to justify the military withdrawal of support by then AFP chief of staff ( Ret.) Gen. Angelo Reyes and his service commanders, which the Supreme Court, then headed by Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr., did not rule as unconstitutional, in legitimizing the Arroyo coup d’etat.

“I expect the soldiers to at least express support to the mass actions taking place now,” he said stressing that he is not urging them to be divided but to be united in defending the 19- year old Charter which congressional allies of the President want to dispose of, while ushering a new one that would effect a shift from the presidential system with a bicameral Congress to the parliamentary system with a unicameral congress through the railroading of the Constituent Assembly (Con-ass), as displayed by the House majority last week.

The bishop also voiced his disappointment with the manner by which the administration lawmakers are now pushing the Constitutional Convention (Con-con) which the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) had earlier declared to be the preferred mode of Charter change.

“I couldn’t believe that our congressmen would stoop to that level. I regard them highly because before I had relatives who were in Congress and they are really good persons,” Tobias said.

Tobias was also pointed to by a former Oakwood Mutiny core leader as having given the then rebel officer, Lt. Lawrence San Juan, who has since sworn allegiance to Mrs. Arroyo, safe haven by hiding him in several safehouses of the bishop.

Despite the sworn affidavit of San Juan pointing to Tobias as the bishop who had given him refuge, intimating that the bishop was part of the alleged coup d’etat then being allegedly planned by the rebel soldiers, the Department of Justice, however, never included him in the list of persons being charged for rebellion and coup d’etat.

The Novaliches bishop is convinced that the shift from Con-ass to Con-con is yet another ploy of the Arroyo government, and he appealed to the public to be more vigilant.

“Vigilance. This is what I am asking our people,” he stressed.

Tobias also rejects the claim that the President has nothing to do with the shift from the Con-ass to the Con-con, saying: “Let’s put it this way, this is one means to shelter President Arroyo from the things that are happening. But it is she who started all this (Cha-cha moves), the reason we are divided and the reason there is infighting”.

Msgr. Pedro Quitorio, spokesman for the CBCP meantime said the slated Dec. 15 prayer rally to be led by bishops has been moved to Dec. 17 with the participation of other religious leaders and groups.

“Someone has been placed in charge of contacting the others to inform them of the change of schedule. It will be an ecumenical prayer rally,” Quitorio said, adding that the venue would still be held in Luneta at 7pm.

Quitorio also said the CBCP has not bothered to check with the Manila authorities if if Pagcor (Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corp.) had already booked two months ago the venue where the CBCP had intended to hold the prayer march.

In Baguio City, a priest said the rally there will have at least 100,000 people joining, to express their indignation over the manner Cha-cha is being forced upon the people by Mrs. Arroyo and her allies.

Also in his homily, Tobias asked the public to unite in rejecting any plans to amend the Charter through Con-ass or the new strategy of the Arroyo allies.

“We should be one voice in saying tama na yan! (Enough is enough!),” the prelate said noting that the people should not be afraid to join mass actions since this would be for the betterment of the country.

“Let us not be afraid to join this massive mass action. Adventurism is done too for changing the Charter,” he declared.

For the United Opposition (UNO), it is calling for the resignation of Mrs. Arroyo and her allies in the House or the alternative, snap elections.

Uno, in a press statement quoting its president, Makati City Mayor Jejomar Binay, said:”First, the postponement of the Asean summit in Cebu. Then, the backing off by the House from its Con-ass plan. These two hasty retreats, coming as they did in quick succession, is a clear indication that GMA and her administration allies realize that they no longer enjoy any kind of mandate or support from the majority of the Filipino people.

“These should be more than enough reason now for the President and the majority congressmen to resign their positions. However, should they ignore this, as it is to be expected, Binay said a snap election for President can be held to coincide with the May 2007 polls. In that manner, it should not entail any considerable additional expense,” he said.

Binay also said that the House has not really officially and formally canceled Con-ass. He also cited the turnaround of some members of the House majority in the Con-ass issue as another indication of the lack of popular support for it.

“The House leadership can deny this all they want, or give all sorts of explanations for it, but the fact remains that the House majority has developed major cracks within its ranks and is about ready to disintegrate,” Binay said.

Protest movements previously planned will still go on. A rally will push through as scheduled today at the Batasan, to be participated in by several multi-sectoral people’s organizations. The CBCP-led inter-faith assembly, Binay announced.

House Deputy Minority leader and partylist Rep. Satur Ocampo (Bayan Muna) urged the public to maintain war footing as long as Speaker Jose de Venecia and his allies refuse to drop the adopted house resolution that calls for the convening of the Con-ass to pave the way for Cha-cha.

Ocampo and other members of the opposition including some members of the Liberal Party urged the Speaker and the majority to finally drop House Resolution 197 which the majority adopted Thursday morning last week.

“The imperative now is for Speaker Jose de Venecia and other surrogates of President Arroyo to formally withdraw House Resolution 197 immediately and without any preconditions,” said Ocampo.

The minorioty bloc also sought the restoration of the deletion of the House rule which was railroaded by the majority.

The House with a vote of 161-25, amended Section 105 of the House rules, which provide for the swift deliberations of the measure without going through the normal process of committee hearings and plenary approvals.

The Speaker Saturday said the House majority is deferring Con-ass following continued calls from various sectors including the Catholic Church and the El Shaddai not to push Cha-cha via Con-ass while giving the Senate 72 hours from yesterday to call for a Con-con election.

House minority leader Francis Escudero, during a press conference, said the opposition and the LP identified with Senator Franklin Drilon would not heed the deadline set by the Speaker for the House and the Senate to agree on a resolution calling for a ConCon.

Oher opposition members said a mere announcement of the Speaker that they are deferring Con-ass was a ploy, and for them to show their sincerity, they should now withdraw the resolution.

Escudero said to be able to withdraw the resolution and restore the amendment in the rules, the move should be initiated by the 161 members of the majority that approved the two resolutions.
With Dona Policar
ConAss fallout widens as junior officers warn Arroyo regime

DOJ warns govt staff to keep out of protests

Arroyo allies retreat

Charter Change: Fraudulent Constituent Assembly

The Philippines notorious political con artists Gloria Arroyo and Jose De Venecia wants to impose half-baked Philippine constitution to what the acting majority leader Arthur Defensor said was a motion on a matter moris an insult to 80 millions Filipinos. The out-numbered minority members in the lower house cannot stop Malcananang evil forces. Military intervention with the support of patriotic citizens can neutralize these shameful bloodsuckers. REVOLUTION is the answer to fraudulent Arroyo-De Venecia constitution!

When is the right time to call for military intervention? It’s now or never! Calling for military action to stop Arroyo-De Venecia madness to trample the existing constitution is within the bound of law. Fake president Gloria Arroyo is not the State including the shameless congressmen. These greedy traitors want to force a fraudulent charter without public scrutiny and debate. The constitution is the basic law of the land. What happens if the proposed constitution is half-baked or half-cooked? The Filipino people will definitely in the polls. It’s just a waste of time and taxpayers money.

Philippine Constitution 1987
The declaration of principles and state policies principles
Section 3.
Civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military. The Armed Forces of the Philippines is the protector of the people and the State. Its goal is to secure the sovereignty of the State and the integrity of the national territory.

Millions of warm bodies is not enough to oust the corrupt Arroyo regime. EDSA Tres as a very large protest rally that was sparked by the arrest in April 2001 of newly ousted President Joseph Estrada. The mass protest rally was held for several days in a major highway in Manila and Malacanang Palace. The protest was led by members of the political opposition Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Miriam Defensor Santiago and Vicente Sotto III. Why EDSA Tres was not successful uprising? The military and the police force sided with Gloria Arroyo. Military intervention is a key factor in a successful people power revolt in the Philippines.


The worst is yet to come

The latest version of Malacañang’s charter change via a Senate-less Con-Ass shows the depth of the desperation of Gloria Arroyo and her cohorts.

When I say cohorts, that includes House Speaker Jose de Venecia and his dishonorable gang.

In a text statement, Rep. Roilo Golez (Parañaque) yesterday said: "Last night, I witnessed one of the saddest and most saddening episodes in the history of the House (of Representatives.)

"Akbayan Rep. Mario Aguja was delivering a privilege speech on the impending water crisis when his speech and interpellation was unceremoniously terminated to give way important than the water crisis.

"It turned out that Defensor’s motion was to amend Section 105 of the House Rules stating that resolutions to amend or revise the Constitution ‘shall follow the procedure for the enactment of bills.’ Defensor’s motion was to scrap that procedure to allow a constitutional amendment procedure without participation of the Senate.

"It showed utter insensitivity and apathy to the water crisis now facing the nation, especially Metro Manila. And it was a below the belt motion because it constituted changing the rules in the middle of the game.

"The majority relented only when their number dwindled as that motion required approval by majority of all the members of the House. It’s unbelievable how some people would utterly push aside a grave public interest issue to give way to their political interest."

Golez further said: "But as street pundits say, we ain’t seen nothing yet. Expect worse next week when they start their direct assault on the Constitution with their machetes."

Since Monday, Arroyo has been holding meetings with congressmen on this new assault to the Constitution that they are planning. The reported timetable is their version of Con-Ass without the Senate on Dec. 6, a new Constitution that would change the system of government to parliamentary by Dec. 12, a nationwide plebiscite to approve the new Constitution on Feb. 12, and election for members of the Parliament by Nov. 30.

In this scenario, the May elections would be cancelled and the term of offices of the congressmen would be extended for six months up to Nov. 30.

We all know of course that what Arroyo and De Venecia are cooking up is unconstitutional. The Constitution provides three ways to amend the Constitution: Congress, by a vote of three-fourths, convening as a constitutional assembly; Constitutional Convention; and People’s Initiative.

People’s Initiative is out of the question because survey after survey shows that majority of the Filipino people are against changing the Constitution now. A Social Weather Stations survey showed 67 percent of the Filipinos oppose Cha-Cha now while only 29 would go for it. Pulse Asia’s showed 42 percent are against Cha-Cha now with 39 percent in favor.

Those survey figures support the Supreme Court’s judgment that it was a fraudulent "People’s Initiative" that Malacañang stooges, Sigaw ng Bayan and ULAP (Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines, presented before the Comelec as its first attempt to change the charter.

Constitutional Convention is not being considered by Malacañang because it takes time and a huge budget.

We can imagine that money is not much of a problem for Arroyo since she has access to government treasury. But she has problem with time.

It’s now December and mid-term election will be held in May. The national sentiment, as reflected in a Pulse Asia survey of senatorial preferences, anybody associated with Arroyo is bad news. In the national level, administration candidates are expected to get a thrashing. "Pupulutin sa kangkungan," is the perfect Tagalog description of the election prospects of Arroyo’s candidates in the May elections.

The local election is a different ball game but there’s a high probability that people’s disdain for Arroyo could be a curse for those running for a seat in the Lower House. A defeat of Arroyo’s candidates in the 2007 elections, would make her vulnerable to impeachment.

Of course, Arroyo can again activate the cheating machinery that worked overtime for her in the 2004 election. But she would need the cooperation of the military.

We have no doubt that AFP chief Hermogenes Esperon would not be so averse to reprise what he did in 2004 as hinted by Comelec Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano in the "Hello Garci" tapes but that would really cause more revulsion among members of the armed forces who are conscious of their supposed non-partisan role in elections.

That’s one of the concerns of just-resigned Defense Secretary Avelino Cruz. He felt that he could no longer guarantee to officers that the military will be insulated in the 2007 elections.

Even if she escapes impeachment up to 2010, Arroyo knows the danger she faces once she is out of power. She would be made to pay for the crimes she had committed against the Filipino people. Charter change to her is survival.

We seriously doubt she and De Venecia and all 194 congressmen will succeed with their fake Con-Ass. Even if they get the Supreme Court, without Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban, to go along with them, there is no telling what happens with an incensed public and all the institutions damaged.

Sen. Franklin Drilon spoke about Arroyo’s plan to impose martial law early this year which Secretary Cruz had opposed. Cruz, in an interview wit ANC’s Ricky Carandang said US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had warned against it.

A Malacañang source gave us a slightly different scenario contemplated last year, when the hard-liners in Malacañang thought that Arroyo would fall. He said there was a talk of a "Coup-me" the establishment of a junta to be composed of Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, national secretary adviser Norberto Gonzales, Transportation Secretary Leandro Mendoza, and Public Works Secretary Hermogenes Ebdane. We were told that Arroyo’s brother, Diosdado "Buboy" Macapagal Jr. was included in the junta.

In her desperation, what would prevent Arroyo from coming up with another variation of martial law? The people should be on guard. The worst is yet to come.

Readers who missed a column can go to http://www.ellentordesillas.com

Email address: ellentordesillas@gmail.com

Arroyo allies in House set Dec. 6 constituent assembly
67% Filipinos NO To Charter Change
The Truth Behind Cha-Cha
By hook or by crook
House Cha-cha moves: A Case of Conflict of Interest?
Church to oppose constituent assembly
From the raging crowd
It's all-out war against constituent assembly
Cha Cha is about Political Survival

Supreme Court Rejected Bogus People's Initiative

It’s a sweet victory of the Filipino people. The Philippine Supreme Court’s junking of bogus Sigaw-ULAP people's initiative is worst political defeat of Gloria Arroyo-Jose De Venecia. The next battle ground will be in 2007 midterm elections. The end of corrupt and inept Arroyo regime is expected soon. Yes, ROPE for Gloria! Hang ‘em high! An arm length manila rope is enough on Gloria’s neck. The de facto General Ermita- led civilian-military junta will crumble or a subsequent domino effect. The peoples’ court will decide their fate under the new regime. Supreme Court Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban has redeemed himself or restored his reputation after his vital role in the “illegal” swearing-in of then Vice-President Gloria Arroyo as president of the republic in a successful Edsa Dos coup d’etat. Chief Justice Panganiban has sided with the people.


The people win, 8 to 7
SC: People’s Initiative ‘deceptive, misleading’

BY EVANGELINE DE VERA
How they voted
To reject:
Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban, Associate Justices Antonio Carpio (the ponente), Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez, Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez, Conchita Carpio-Morales, Romeo Callejo Sr., and Adolfo Azcuna. Panganiban, Santiago, Gutierrez, Callejo, and Azcuna wrote separate concurring opinions.
To grant:
Senior Associate Justice Reynato Puno (writer of the dissenting opinion), Justices Leonardo Quisumbing, Renato Corona, Dante Tiñga, Minita Chico-Nazario, Cancio Garcia and Presbiterio Velasco Jr.
VOTING 8-7, the Supreme Court yesterday threw out the consolidated petitions for people’s initiative to amend the 1987 Constitution, branding the Palace-backed proposal to shift to a unicameral parliamentary form of government as "deceptive and misleading."
In a 52-page en banc decision penned by Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, the high court denied due course to what it called a "constitutionally infirm" petition for initiative jointly filed by Sigaw ng Bayan and the Union of Local Authorities of the Philippines (ULAP) led by Raul Lambino and Bohol Gov. Erico Aumentado, respectively.
The SC said the initiative mounted by the Sigaw and ULAP called for a wholesale revision and not a mere amendment of the Constitution, thus, violating Section 2, Article 17 of the Constitution which limited the scope of a people’s initiative to mere amendments.
The high court said the petitioners failed to inform initiative signers of the nature and effect of the proposals. It said this is "deceptive and misleading, which renders the initiative void."
The SC also said the signature sheets do not contain a single word, phrase or sentence on the changes proposed by the Lambino group.
It cited Lambino’s admission during oral arguments last September 26 that the signature sheets do not state the text of the proposed changes.
"The unbending requirement is that the people must first see the full text of the proposed amendments before they sign to signify their assent and that the people must sign on an initiative petition that contains the full text of the proposed amendments," the SC ruled.
"An initiative that gathered signatures from the people without first showing to the people the full text of the proposed amendments is most likely a deception, and can operate as a gigantic fraud on the people," the Court added.
Concurring in the decision were Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban, Associate Justices Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez, Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez, Conchita Carpio-Morales, Romeo Callejo Sr., and Adolfo Azcuna. Panganiban, Santiago, Gutierrez, Callejo, and Azcuna wrote separate concurring opinions.
The dissenting justices were Senior Associate Justice Reynato Puno, Justices Leonardo Quisumbing, Renato Corona, Dante Tiñga, Minita Chico-Nazario, Cancio Garcia and Presbiterio Velasco Jr.
The dissent argued for a remand of the petition to the Comelec for verification of the over six million signatures. No one voted to grant the Lambino prayer to reverse the Comelec ruling on August 31 and subject the proposed constitutional changes to a plebiscite.
The Court said that having established the infirmity of the petition, there was no need to revisit the 1997 Santiago v Comelec ruling which stopped the Comelec from entertaining petitions for initiative for lack of an enabling law.
"Verily, the Supreme Court is now on the crossroads of history. By its decision, the Court and each of its members shall be judged by posterity. Ten years, fifty years, a hundred years – or even a thousand years – from now, what the Court did here, and how each justice opined and voted, will still be talked about, either in shame or in pride. Indeed, the hand-washing of Pontius Pilate, the abomination of Dred Scott, and the loathing of Javellana still linger and haunt to this day… Let not this case fall into the same damnation. Rather, let this Court be known throughout the nation and the world for its independence, integrity, industry and intelligence," Panganiban said.
Panganiban, who cast the deciding vote that broke the tie in the decision, was one of the six dissenting justices in the Santiago ruling.
He said his current stand is "completely consistent with previous opinions and votes."
The Court said that Lambino’s admission that he caused the printing of only 100,000 copies of the petition for initiative "binds the Lambino group and establishes beyond any doubt that they failed to show the full text of the proposed changes to the great majority of the people who signed the signature sheet."
Thus, of the 6.3 million signatories, only 100,000 signatories could have received with certainty each a copy of the petition.
In ruling that the Sigaw and ULAP petitions called for a revision, the Court said the proposed shift to a unicameral parliamentary system, the abolition of the Office of the President and one chamber of Congress would require changes in at least 105 provisions of the Constitution.
The SC said it cannot abandon its primordial duty to defend and protect the Constitution.
"The Constitution, which embodies the people’s sovereign will, is the bible of this Court. This Court exists to defend and protect the Constitution. To allow this constitutionally infirm initiative, propelled by deceptively gathered signatures, to alter the basic principles in the Constitution is to allow a desecration of the Constitution. To allow such alteration and desecration is to lose this Court’s raison d’etre," the Court said.

The Court said the Constitution, being the fundamental law of the land, deserves the utmost respect and obedience of all the citizens of the nation. "No one can trivialize the Constitution by cavalierly amending or revising it in blatant violation of the clearly specified modes of amendment and revision laid down in the Constitution itself," it said.

The Court said that to allow such change in the fundamental law "is to set adrift the Constitution in unchartered waters, to be tossed and turned by every dominant political group of the day."

"If this Court allows today a cavalier change in the Constitution outside the constitutionally prescribed modes, tomorrow the new dominant political group that comes will demand its own set of changes in the same cavalier and unconstitutional fashion. A revolving-door constitution does not augur well for the rule of law in this country."

The Court said "incantations of ‘people’s voice,’ ‘people’s sovereign will,’ or ‘let the people decide’ cannot override the specific modes of changing the Constitution as prescribed in the Constitution itself." "Otherwise, the Constitution – the people’s fundamental covenant that provides enduring stability to our society – becomes easily susceptible to manipulative changes by political groups gathering signatures through false promises. Then, the Constitution ceases to be the bedrock of the nation’s stability," it added.

1987 Philippine Constitution Charter Change: People’s Initiative

Black and White Movement Poster
The proposed unicameral system shall abolish the senate. Majority of Philippine senators want to convene Constitutional Convention to REVISE the 1987 Philippine Constitution. The Sigaw ng Bayan people’s initiative can only AMEND the Constitution. Fundamental changes in the proposed parliamentary and federal form of government is categorize as total REVISION of the Constitution. The Malacanang- sponsored people’s initiative is full of deception. Ordinary Filipinos canhardlyunderstand the proposed amendments. It’s impossible in a short period of time that the so-called barangay assembly fully discussed all suggested amendments. Malacanang Palace mobilized local government units to gather petition signatures for charter change thru peoples’ initiative. There is no enabling law allowing the people’s initiative to amend the Constitution. The organizers, Sigaw ng Bayan and ULAP are just fooling the people to sign charter change petition without explaining what they are signing for. Signatories to the petition had been enticed by offers of money and a sack of rice each to sign the petition. Mrs. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo wants consolidate political power in the proposed parliamentary unicameral system. Majority of the Filipino people wants charter change thru Constitutional Convention and after the end of the Arroyo’s presidency.

Mrs. Gloria Arroyo cannot conceal her intent to stay in political power beyond 2010 and obsessive desire for money and material wealth. Arroyo and her congressional cohorts want to impose against the will of the Filipino people a bogus peoples’ initiative for charter change and alternative CON-ASS. They are desperate and do all remedies to satisfy their greed for power. Gloria Arroyo’s greed for power can be traced back in 2001 power grab and massive cheating in 2004 presidential elections. Malacanang sponsored charter change contradicts the aspiration of the Filipino people for economic freedom and genuine republican democracy.

ARTICLE XVII
AMENDMENTS OR REVISIONS
Section 1. Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution may be proposed by:
(1) The Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members; or
(2) A constitutional convention.

Section 2. Amendments to this Constitution may likewise be directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition of at least twelve per centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters therein. No amendment under this section shall be authorized within five years following the ratification of this Constitution nor oftener than once every five years thereafter.

The Congress shall provide for the implementation of the exercise of this right.
Section 3. The Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of all its Members, call a constitutional convention, or by a majority vote of all its Members, submit to the electorate the question of calling such a convention.
Section 4. Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution under Section 1 hereof shall be valid when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the approval of such amendment or revision.

Any amendment under Section 2 hereof shall be valid when ratified by a majority of the votes cast in a plebiscite which shall be held not earlier than sixty days nor later than ninety days after the certification by the Commission on Elections of the sufficiency of the petition.

Related Links:
Only Names Verified, Not Signatures in Sigaw ng Bayan-ULAP's PI
Philippine Constitution Article XVII Amendment or Revision
PCIJ
Charter Change