The basic law of the land must be dynamic and responsive to the changing needs of the nation. There are several provisions in the Constitution that need to be amended, clarified or deleted. The public must decide whether some provisions, such as the one invoked to justify the military’s breaking the chain of command and ousting the president, has been good for this democratic country. Certain powers, such as those of the judiciary, need to be better defined.
If proponents of Charter change want to drum up public support, however, they should make their objectives clear. Previous attempts by several administrations and congresses have created negative public perceptions about Cha-cha. Since the first serious attempt during the presidency of Fidel Ramos, Cha-cha has been seen as an effort to get rid of one of the objectives of the so-called Freedom Constitution, which is to prevent anyone from perpetuating himself in power.
Whether through the outright lifting of term limits, or by shifting to a parliamentary system, which would allow former presidents to return to power by becoming prime minister, this reason for Cha-cha is seen as a manifestation of greed for power and its perks.
When President Aquino announced recently that he did not intend to seek a second term, Cha-cha proponents thought one obstacle to their advocacy had been removed. But the perception is still there, that the latest revival of the Cha-cha initiative is mainly about giving former presidents a path back to power, and lifting the term limits of lawmakers. That perception stymied every effort by Jose de Venecia to sell the argument that the country’s salvation lies in shifting to a parliamentary system.
That perception has also prevented the country from pursuing constitutional changes that could make the country more competitive in the global economy. For this purpose, Malacañang must study whether an executive order can achieve the results envisioned in some of the proposed Charter amendments. Amid the renewed calls for Cha-cha, what resonates at this time is the argument of President Aquino against it: no case has been made to show that the country will be at risk if it does not amend the Constitution.
