The central tenet of Charter Change
In today’s (May 4, 2006) Inquirer, Manuel L. Quezon III wrote on Charter Change and the enormous leaps of logic and faith that are required to support such an endeavor. Emphasis ours.
I’ll tell you what the pro-Charter change arguments boil down to: If you eliminate all checks and balances, if you remove all controls preventing a one-party state and a president-for-life (or prime minister-for-life), if you remove the legal limitations on the exercise of presidential will and whim; in other words, if you absolutely trust not only the President (who, after all, won’t live forever), but more importantly, the majority coalition tolerating her leadership for the moment, then you should be for constitutional change.
After all, the only assurance you have is not on paper or in the system. The only assurance you can have depends on a single assumption: that given absolute, unlimited, unquestionable power, a coalition, any coalition, can be trusted-and expected-to use its power only for the public good, never for its own, selfish interests, and surely not for the benefit of its political allies. In other words, all you have is faith.
Faith in whom? Don’t think in terms of the administration coalition. Think of any coalition. Because democracy is not about a particular group holding power forever. It is also about the probability that one day, today’s minority could be tomorrow’s majority. Either side can’t be given what those in power today wants. Because no one, no group, should have such complete, unquestionable, power. To surrender that power to one individual or group is madness and reflects a lunatic attitude toward governance.Would you hand anyone, in the administration or the opposition, today’s leaders and, perhaps, tomorrow’s leaders, too, a blank check?
(”What’s in it for you” full text here)
The focus on Charter Change is on the massive political shift, and Quezon’s article clarifies exactly why this should concern each and every Filipino.
Yet with the attention almost exclusively on the parliamentary debate, people ignore the even more damning changes that the Constitutional Commission proposed regarding our economy and national patrimony.
The State may explore, develop, and utilize natural resources, or enter into co-production, joint venture, or production-sharing agreements with corporations fully owned (no longer 40%) by foreigners.
and
Land classified in accordance with law as industrial, commercial or residential may be transferred or conveyed to foreign individuals or corporations with foreign ownership. Congress shall define the conditions for ownership of allowable lands by foreign individuals and by corporations with foreign ownership. However, Congress should define the conditions and limitations (such as area) on such lands, if and when transferred to foreign individuals and corporations with substantial foreign ownership.
as well as
Citizenship restriction on franchises and thus ownership of public utilities is removed. Congress should enact legislation to provide that franchises granted to corporations with substantial foreign ownership are limited to public utilities of large scale.
Alongside yet more proposals (see ConCom site for highlights).
These proposals are nothing more than an open invitation for destructive, extractive industries - with mining at the forefront - to enter the Philippines and enrich themselves off our own resources.
As if there weren’t enough reasons to resist ChaCha, the list grows longer day by day.
