Supreme Court E-Library
Information At Your Fingertips

  View printer friendly version

CALL TO ORDER

At 3:17 p.m., the President of the Constitutional Commission, the Honorable Cecilia Muñoz Palma, called the session to order.

PRAYER

The Chair designated Mr. Tingson to lead the prayer or invocation.

ROLL CALL

Upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary-General of the Commission called the Roll, to which the following Members responded:

Abubakar, Y. R.	Nieva, M. T. F.
Aquino, F. S.	Nolledo, J.N.
Azcuna, A. S.	Ople, B. F.
Bacani, T. C.	Muñoz Palma, C.
Bengzon, J. F. S.	Quesada, M. L. M.
Bennagen, P. L.	Rama, N. G.
Bernas, J. G.	Regalado, F. D.
Rosario Braid, F.	De los Reyes, R. F.
Brocka, L. O.	Rigos, C. A.
Calderon, J. D.	Rodrigo, F. A.
De Castro, C.M.	Romulo, R. J.
Colayco, J. C.	Rosales, D. R.
Concepcion, R. R.	Sarmiento, R. V.
Davide, H. G.	Suarez, J. E.
Foz, V. B.	Sumulong, L. M.
Gascon, J. L. M. C.	Tadeo, J. S. L.
Guingona, S. V. C.	Tan, C.
Jamir, A. M. K.	Tingson, G. J.
Laurel, J. B.	Treñas, E. B.
Maambong, R. E.	Uka, L. L.
Monsod, C. S.	Villacorta, W. V.
Natividad, T. C.	Villegas, B. M.

With 44 Members present, the Chair declared the presence of a quorum.

The following Members appeared after the Roll Call:

Alonto, A. D.	Lerum, E. R.
Garcia, E, G.	Padilla, A. B.

INQUIRY AND MOTION OF MR. DAVIDE

At this juncture, Mr. Davide posed an inquiry, 1) as to whether the Provisional Rules provide for the singing of the national anthem followed by an invocation at every session; and 2) moved that an amendment be made on the Order of Business to provide for the oath-taking of the Secretary-General and the Sergeant-at-Arms.  

In response to the query, the President stated that the Secretariat recalls that the motion of Mr. Tingson refers only to the recital of the daily prayer and not the singing of the national anthem. The written minutes of the caucus of the previous day, however, will be referred to to clarify the matter.

Acting on the motion, the Chair forthwith administered the oath of office to Professor Flerida Ruth P. Romero and Mr. Roberto M. San Andres as Secretary-General and Sergeant-at-Arms, respectively.

READING AND APPROVAL OF THE JOURNAL

Mr. Rama moved for the reading and approval of the Journal of the previous session.

At this juncture, Mr. Bengzon proposed amendments to the Journal specifically in relation to the provisions of the Provisional Rules on the position of the Assistant Floor Leaders. The Chair, however, stated that the amendments would follow the reading of the Journal.

Thereupon, on motion of Mr. Davide, duly seconded and there being no objection, the reading of the Journal of the previous session was dispensed with.

Thereafter, on motion of Mr. Rama, duly seconded, the Body approved the Journal of the previous session with the following amendments:

1. On motion of Mr. Davide, on page 1, line 3, after the word "purpose", add the words "namely, Bishop Adriel O. Meimban, Reverend Cirilo Rigos, Professor Abdul Raffih Sayedy, Ricardo Cardinal Vidal and Bishop Sotero Mitra" and on page 4, second paragraph under the heading ENTRY OF THE PRESIDENT, insert the words "and the audience" between "Body" and "gave" so that the sentence will read: "The Body and the audience gave the President a standing ovation."

2. On motion of Mr. Davide, taking into account Mr. Rodrigo's observation and considering the Chair's suggestion, in lieu of the summary on page 3 under ADDRESS OF THE PRESIDENT, to incorporate the full text of said address, to wit:

Vice-President Laurel, Chief Justice Teehankee, Members of the Diplomatic Corps, Members of the Cabinet, Dean Adriel O. Meimban, Bishop Sotero Mitra, Rev. Cirilo Rigos, Dean Abdul Raffih Sayedy, His Eminence Ricardo Cardinal Vidal, Members of the Constitutional Commission, distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen:

You are here today vested with the full authority and the complete independence to write our country's new Constitution. Nobody, not even I, your President, can interfere with or overrule you in this great task. Our nation has placed its trust in you. Do not let it down.

I join you today to honor your beginning. What happens from here on is a matter for you and you alone.

Today, apart from wishing you well and saying that the hopes and prayers of our nation are with you, I want to make only two points. The first is, please be quick. Nobody can impose a deadline on your deliberations but you know that our whole nation is eager for a new constitution, and the subsequent elections as soon as possible. The people expect a constitutional draft within three months for their sovereign acceptance or rejection. So eager are they to have, in the shortest time possible, a full-blown democratic republic.

Second, please limit yourselves to your constitutional mission. Your task is to design a constitution that will provide for a new legislature, not to do that legislature's work for it. That is for the people's elected representatives to do.

You must define and protect our individual freedoms and rights; you must decide how our different institutions of state will relate to each other. Do not be distracted by political debates and matters of policy that do not belong within your constitution-making exercise. You are here appointed, by the people's wish, to write a constitution; you are not here as elected politicians.

Bear in mind that you shall be pondering, debating and writing a constitution not only for our contemporaries with their present concerns but also for succeeding generations of Filipinos whose first concerns we cannot presume to know beforehand. Future Filipinos must always be free to decide how to address these concerns as they arise. Even the wisest cures for present maladies should not be imposed on succeeding generations that will have their own, unique problems and priorities.

True and long-lived constitutions, a wise justice has told me, should be broad enough to be able to meet every exigency we cannot foretell and specific enough to stoutly protect the essentials of a true democracy; in short, open-ended documents that will always be relevant. Remember that constitutional changes are not safe or easy to come by. Our first attempt at constitutional revision was followed by a dictatorship. And this, our second endeavor, was preceded by a revolution.

Future Filipinos and their legislatures and Supreme Courts can best assess and address the challenges they will meet if they enjoy the widest latitude of thought and action. In writing a constitution, have the fullest confidence that the wisdom of our race has not exhausted itself in us. Our race has grown in wisdom over time. I believe it will continue to do so.

Yours is indeed no easy task. On the other hand, depending on the result, yours will be no small glory. Our people have suffered much. I hope we shall always concern ourselves with the needs of our people.

Thank you and Godspeed.

3. On motion of Mr. Bengzon, on Appendix 1, page 1, line 6, and page 2, line 21, change the words "an Assistant Floor leader" to "three (3) Assistant Floor Leaders"; and to reflect the changes relative to the Assistant Floor Leaders where necessary in Appendix 1.

REFERENCE OF BUSINESS

On motion of Mr. Rama, duly seconded and there being no objection, the Body proceeded to the Reference of Business.

REFERRAL TO COMMITTEES OF RESOLUTIONS

Upon direction of the Chair, the Secretary-General read, on First Reading, the titles of the following proposed Resolutions which were, in turn, referred by the Chair to the Committees hereunder indicated:

RESOLUTIONS ON FIRST READING

Proposed Resolution No. 1, entitled:

RESOLUTION URGING THE COMMISSION TO FIRST DECIDE ON THE ISSUE OF SYSTEM, TYPE AND FORM OF GOVERNMENT

Introduced by Honorable Davide, Jr.

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

Proposed Resolution No. 2, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION A PREAMBLE

Introduced by Honorable Davide, Jr.

TO THE COMMITTEE ON PREAMBLE, NATIONAL TERRITORY, AND DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES

Proposed Resolution No. 3, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION AN ARTICLE ON DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES AND STATE POLICIES

Introduced by Honorable Davide, Jr.

TO THE COMMITTEE ON PREAMBLE, NATIONAL TERRITORY, AND DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES

Proposed Resolution No. 4, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION AN ARTICLE ON THE BILL OF RIGHTS

Introduced by Honorable Davide, Jr.

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CITIZENSHIP, BILL OF RIGHTS, POLITICAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Proposed Resolution No. 6, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION AN ARTICLE ON DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS OF CITIZENS

Introduced by Honorable Davide, Jr.

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CITIZENSHIP, BILL OF RIGHTS, POLITICAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Proposed Resolution No. 6, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION AN ARTICLE ON NATIONAL TERRITORY TO ENSURE THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE REPUBLIC OVER SABAH AND OVER SEAS RECOGNIZED BY THE 1982 UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA

Introduced by Honorable Davide, Jr.

TO THE COMMITTEE ON PREAMBLE, NATIONAL TERRITORY, AND DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES

Proposed Resolution No. 7, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION AN ARTICLE ON CITIZENSHIP

Introduced by Honorable Davide, Jr.

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CITIZENSHIP, BILL OF RIGHTS, POLITICAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Proposed Resolution No. 8, entitled

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION AN ARTICLE ON SUFFRAGE

Introduced by Honorable Davide, Jr.

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CITIZENSHIP, BILL OF RIGHTS, POLITICAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Proposed Resolution No. 9, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION LIMITATIONS ON THE EXERCISE OF THE AUTHORITY TO PROCLAIM MARTIAL LAW OR SUSPEND THE PRIVILEGE OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS BY LIMITING ITS DURATION AND REQUIRING CONCURRENCE BY THE LEGISLATURE, EXPRESSLY VESTING UPON THE SUPREME COURT JURISDICTION TO INQUIRE INTO THE SUFFICIENCY OF THE BASIS OF SUCH PROCLAMATION OR SUSPENSION AND TO SET ASIDE THE SAME IF NO BASIS EXISTS, AND GRANTING THE LEGISLATURE THE AUTHORITY TO REVOKE OR EXTEND A PROCLAMATION OR SUSPENSION

Introduced by Honorable Davide, Jr.

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE EXECUTIVE

Proposed Resolution No. 10, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO INCORPORATE IN THE NEW CONSTITUTION A PROVISION RESERVING TO FILIPINO CITIZENS OR TO CORPORATIONS OR ASSOCIATIONS WHOSE CAPITAL IS WHOLLY OWNED BY FILIPINO CITIZENS ALONE THE PRIVILEGE AND RIGHT TO DISPOSE, EXPLORE, DEVELOP, EXPLOIT OR UTILIZE THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE COUNTRY

Introduced by Honorable Davide, Jr.

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY

Proposed Resolution No. 11, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO GIVE HIGHEST PRIORITY TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT FORM OF GOVERNMENT THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION WILL ADOPT IN THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTITUTION OF 1986

Introduced by Honorable de Los Reyes, Jr.

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

Proposed Resolution No. 12, entitled:

RESOLUTION DECLARING THAT RIVERS, LAKES, BAYS AND LAGOONS AND OTHER BODIES OF WATER BELONG TO ALL THE PEOPLE AND SHALL BE MAINTAINED AS COMMUNAL FISHING GROUNDS AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Introduced by Honorable de los Reyes, Jr.

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY

Proposed Resolution No. 13, entitled:

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE RECITATION OF A PRAYER AT THE OPENING OF EVERY PLENARY SESSION, COMMITTEE MEETING, PUBLIC HEARING AND OTHER DELIBERATION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Introduced by Honorable Tingson

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

Proposed Resolution No. 14, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO RETAIN THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE X, SECTION 11 (1) OF THE 1973 CONSTITUTION AND TO MAKE THE SAME MANDATORY AND APPLICABLE TO CASES PENDING BEFORE THE COURTS  

Introduced by Honorable de los Reyes, Jr. and Maambong

TO THE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Proposed Resolution No. 15, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION WHICH WILL ASSURE RECOGNITION OF THE CORDILLERA REGION, PREVENT ITS FUTURE DISMEMBERMENT AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Introduced by Honorable de los Reyes, Jr. and Maambong

TO THE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Proposed Resolution No. 16, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE FOR A NEW ARTICLE ON CONSERVATION

Introduced by Honorable Azcuna

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY

Proposed Resolution No. 17, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE FOR REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS

Introduced by Honorable Azcuna

TO THE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

Proposed Resolution No. 18, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT OF AMPARO

Introduced by Honorable Azcuna

TO THE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

Proposed Resolution No. 19, entitled:

RESOLUTION ON THE ROLE OF FARMERS AND WORKERS

Introduced by Honorable Azcuna

TO THE COMMITTEE ON GENERAL PROVISIONS

Proposed Resolution No. 20, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE FOR AUTHENTIC LAND REFORM

Introduced by Honorable Azcuna

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY

Proposed Resolution No. 21, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO PROVIDE IN .THE CONSTITUTION THAT NO TRANSACTION INVOLVING PUBLIC FUNDS WHETHER OF GOVERNMENT ENTITIES OR GOVERNMENT-OWNED OR CONTROLLED ENTERPRISES SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM AUDIT

Introduced by Honorable Nolledo

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS AND AGENCIES

Proposed Resolution No. 22, entitled:

RESOLUTION WITHDRAWING THE RIGHT OF BALIKBAYANS WHO HAVE EMBRACED FOREIGN CITIZENSHIP TO ACQUIRE LANDS IN THE PHILIPPINES

Introduced by Honorable Nolledo

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY

Proposed Resolution No. 23, entitled:

RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A PRESIDENTIAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT FOR THE PHILIPPINES WITH SPECIFIED FEATURES

Introduced by Honorable Nolledo

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE EXECUTIVE

Proposed Resolution No. 24, entitled:

RESOLUTION MAKING THE PREAMBLE MORE CONCISE AND EMPHATIC

Introduced by Honorable Nolledo

TO THE COMMITTEE ON PREAMBLE, NATIONAL TERRITORY, AND DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES

Proposed Resolution No. 25, entitled:

RESOLUTION LIMITING OWNERSHIP OF PRIVATE LANDHOLDINGS

Introduced by Honorable Nolledo

TO THE COMMITTEE ON THE NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY

Proposed Resolution No. 26, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE BILL OF RIGHTS BY PROVIDING THAT THERE IS NO DOUBLE JEOPARDY IN CASE OF MISTRIAL

Introduced by Honorable Nolledo

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CITIZENSHIP, BILL OF RIGHTS, POLITICAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Proposed Resolution No. 27, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE RESOLUTION OF THE SABAH ISSUE IN THE TRANSITORY PROVISIONS

Introduced by Honorable Nolledo

TO THE COMMITTEE ON AMENDMENTS AND TRANSITORY PROVISIONS

Proposed Resolution No. 28, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR A TRIAL IN ABSENTIA OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS WHO HAVE MALVERSED PUBLIC FUNDS OR PLUNDERED THE NATIONAL TREASURY

Introduced by Honorable Nolledo

TO THE COMMITTEE ON CITIZENSHIP, BILL OF RIGHTS, POLITICAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Proposed Resolution No. 29, entitled:

RESOLUTION TO DETERMINE, AT FIRST INSTANCE, THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT TO BE ESTABLISHED

Introduced by Honorable Suarez, Tadeo and Jamir

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

MOTION
Motion No. 1 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

URGENT MOTION TO CONSTITUTE THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION AS AN AD-HOC COMMITTEE TO IMMEDIATELY CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT THAT SHOULD BE SET UP BY THE COMMISSION AND TO DECIDE ON SUCH FORM OF GOVERNMENT WITHIN A SPECIFIED TIME

Presented by Honorable Nolledo

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

Communication No. 1 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

Letter from Mr. Abraham F. Sarmiento, President of the National Alliance for Justice, Freedom and Democracy, enclosing the original of a petition signed by an initial 564 qualified voters asking appropriate action for the disqualification of Messrs. Blas F. Ople, Regalado E. Maambong, Rustico F. de los Reyes, Teodulo C. Natividad and Alejandro D. Almendras from the Constitutional Commission

TO THE COMMITTEE ON PRIVILEGES

SUSPENSION OF SESSION

At this juncture, the session was suspended.

It was 3:54 p.m.

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 4:19 p.m., the session was resumed.

CORRECTION OF REFERRAL OF PROPOSED RESOLUTION NO. 27

On motion of Mr. Bengzon, there being no objection, the Body approved the referral to the Committee on Preamble, National Territory, and Declaration of Principles, instead of the Committee on Amendments and Transitory Provisions, of Proposed Resolution No. 27, entitled:

Resolution providing for the resolution of the Sabah issue in the Transitory Provisions.

DELETION OF AN ITEM IN THE ORDER OF BUSINESS

On motion of Mr. Bengzon, there being no objection, the Body approved the temporary deletion of the letter of Mr. Abraham F. Sarmiento under "Communication" from the Order of Business on the ground that the letter referred to has not yet been received by the President of the Constitutional Commission and that it involves the dignity and integrity of some Members of the Commission.

MOTION OF MR. RAMA

Thereupon, Mr. Rama moved for unanimous consent for the Body to enter into a free-wheeling discussion of the prejudicial issue of form of government and, in this connection, for the consideration of Motion No. 1 filed by Mr. Nolledo, entitled:

Urgent motion to constitute the Constitutional Commission as an Ad Hoc Committee to immediately conduct public hearings on the form of government that should be set up by the Commission and to decide on such form of government within a specified time.

Mr. Rama then asked for the recognition of Mr. Nolledo who manifested his intention to amend the motion.   

PROPOSED RESOLUTION OF MR. DAVIDE

At this juncture, Mr. Davide, adverting to an approved resolution of thanks to Vice-President Salvador H. Laurel, proposed that the Body take up a similar resolution expressing the sense of gratitude of the Members of the Constitutional Commission to President Corazon C. Aquino in appointing them to the Commission and commending her for her patriotism, nationalism and unwavering adherence to democratic traditions in pledging non-interference in the work of the Commission and assuring its independence.

OBJECTION OF MR. BERNAS

Mr. Bernas objected to the proposed resolution by expressing concern about the image of the Commission which, he said, was already subject to criticism for being an appointed body. He stated that an expression of thanks for what is due the Commission would seem to indicate a fawning attitude to the President that would impair the image of independence of the Commission.

In reply to Mr. Davide's query whether he was objecting to the first of two portions of the proposed Resolution, Mr. Bernas stated that he was objecting to both portions.

Thereupon, the Chair requested Mr. Davide to furnish the Secretariat a copy of the proposed Resolution for further study, to which Mr. Davide acceded.

RESTATEMENT OF MR. RAMA'S MOTION

Thereafter, Mr. Rama restated his motion that tie Body start discussing the prejudicial issue on the form of government that will be adopted under the new Constitution. He then asked for the recognition of Mr. Nolledo, movant of Motion No. 1.

At this juncture, Mr. Padilla announced that in a luncheon meeting of the Philippine Constitution Association which he attended together with Messrs. Azcuna, Bengzon, Foz, Guingona and Regalado, the association handed to him a draft of their version of the new Constitution, which draft he was submitting to the President of the Commission.

The Chair acknowledged receipt of the copy and instructed the Secretariat to make as many copies as necessary for distribution to the Members of the Commission.

INQUIRY OF MRS. QUESADA

In reply to the query of Mrs. Quesada on the pending resolution of Mr. Davide which was objected to by Mr. Bernas, the Chair stated that consideration of the resolution was deferred until after printed copies thereof are furnished the Members.

INQUIRIES OF MR. SUAREZ

In reply to the queries of Mr. Suarez, Mr. Rama affirmed that the Body is governed by the Provisional Rules drafted by the Commission and that there should be unanimous consent to suspend the Rules before the Body could proceed to a free-wheeling discussion.

In view thereof, Mr. Suarez suggested the presentation of a formal motion to suspend the Rules in order that the Body could engage in a free-wheeling discussion without applying rigidly the Provisional Rules of the Commission, to which Mr. Rama agreed.

Thereupon, Mr. Rama asked for the Chair's ruling on his motion for a free-wheeling discussion on the nature of government.

Mr. Davide objected because of the absence of a motion to suspend the Rules.

In reply to the query of Mr. Nolledo on the parliamentary situation, the Chair explained that there was a motion to suspend the Rules and consider as urgent Motion No. 1.

APPROVAL OF THE MOTION

There being no further objection, the Body approved the suspension of the Rules for the purpose of considering Motion No. 1 filed by Mr. Nolledo.

MOTION OF MR. NOLLEDO

Upon recognition by the Chair, Mr. Nolledo stated that a copy of the Motion, together with his letter, had been distributed to the Members asking for their support so that the Commission could constitute itself into an Ad Hoc Committee to conduct public hearings on the form of government that should be set up. He stated that similar resolutions were filed by some Members of the Commission and that a letter by Mr. Foz was addressed to the President of the Commission asking for the consideration of the form of government, with the provisions of the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions most of which are embodied in the Freedom Constitution as the bases for discussion.

In view thereof, Mr. Nolledo moved that the Constitutional Commission constitute itself as an Ad Hoc Committee to immediately conduct public hearings for a period of six days on the form of government which the Commission will adopt and thereafter, within six days to discuss in plenary session the merits of every proposal submitted by the different sectors in the course of the public hearings.

Thereupon, Mr. Sarmiento presented an amendment that, instead of the whole Commission, a smaller ad hoc committee be created.

Mr. Nolledo explained that while he had no objection to the amendment, he felt that the question is of such transcendental importance that the proposed amendment would essentially alter his motion. He asked that his motion be submitted to the Body.

SUSPENSION OF SESSION

At this juncture, the session was suspended.

It was 4:40 p.m.

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 4:45 p.m., the session was resumed.

PARLIAMENTARY SITUATION

Thereupon, Mr. Rama clarified the parliamentary situation by stating that there was a proposal by Mr. Sarmiento to amend the motion of Mr. Nolledo.

Mr. Padilla, however, stated that the pending motion was that of the Floor Leader for a free-wheeling discussion on the form of government, and the motion of Mr. Nolledo should have been an amendment to the motion of the Floor Leader.   

Mr. Nolledo explained that he and the Floor Leader had agreed to consolidate their motions, such that the pending motion was to constitute the Body into an Ad Hoc Committee which would conduct public hearings on the form of government without prejudice to an immediate free-wheeling discussion on the matter.

In this connection, Mr. Padilla suggested that instead of a free-wheeling discussion in which so many questions may be raised, there should be a reference on which the discussion would be based in order to expedite the proceedings, in reply to which Mr. Nolledo adverted to his letter to the Members of the Commission suggesting that the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions be made the bases of the discussion.

The Chair then affirmed that the pending question was whether to constitute the Body into an Ad Hoc Committee or to create a smaller committee to conduct public hearings.

INQUIRIES OF MR. SUAREZ

Thereafter, in reply to Mr. Suarez' inquiry on the number of members of the Ad Hoc Committee proposed by Mr. Sarmiento, the latter suggested that it be composed of 30 Members, 10 each from the national, regional and sectoral representatives.

On the manner of their designation, Mr. Sarmiento stated that it could bb left to the discretion of the President of the Commission.

PROPOSAL OF MR. BENGZON

On Mr. Sarmiento's explanations, Mr. Bengzon proposed that the President be given the discretion to determine the number and to select the members of the Ad Hoc Committee without prejudice to allowing other Members to attend the public hearings. He also proposed that the Committee provide for the rules and procedures for the conduct of the public hearings.

Mr. Sarmiento agreed to the proposal.

Mr. Nolledo accepted the amendment of Mr. Sarmiento as modified by Mr. Bengzon.

Moreover, on Mr. Rodrigo's observation that a committee of 30 members would be too unwieldy and on his suggestion that it be reduced to 15, Mr. Bengzon stated that there was an agreement to leave the matter to the discretion of the President.

OBSERVATION OF MR. PADILLA

Thereupon, in reply to Mr. Padilla's observation that all the discussions were out of order, Mr. Nolledo stated that the Rules had been suspended. Mr. Padilla, however, maintained that the Rules were suspended only to allow a free-wheeling discussion but not determine the number and tasks of the Ad Hoc Committee.

Mr. Bengzon then pointed out that the motion of the Floor Leader for the suspension of the Rules to allow a free-wheeling discussion was part of the motion of Mr. Nolledo.

RESTATEMENT OF THE PARLIAMENTARY SITUATION

At this juncture, the Chair restated the parliamentary situation, explaining that the pending motion was to authorize the President of the Commission to create a smaller ad hoc committee which would set the rules and procedures on the conduct of public hearings.

INQUIRY OF MR. RODRIGO

In reply to Mr. Rodrigo's query on whether the task of the Ad Hoc Committee was limited to providing said rules, Mr. Bengzon explained that it would also conduct public hearings on the form of government.

APPROVAL OF THE MOTION

Thereafter, the Chair submitted the motion of Mr. Nolledo to a vote, and with 33 Members in favor and 8 against, the same was approved by the Body.

REMARKS OF MR. RODRIGO

At this juncture, Mr. Rodrigo stated for the record that whatever positions the Members may take as to the form of government during the free-wheeling discussion would not be taken as final as they would consider the results of the public hearings to be conducted by the Ad Hoc Committee.

On motion of Mr. Rama, the Chair recognized Mr. Bernas.

REMARKS OF MR. BERNAS

Mr. Bernas stated that there are basically two areas which could be used to set the parameters in the discussion on the form of government; 1) the classification of government based on the relationship between the Executive and the Legislature; and 2) the classification of government based on the relationship between the national and local governments.

He explained that the first classification generally refers to the presidential or parliamentary form of government or a combination of both, stating that a presidential form of government is characterized by separation of powers among the executive, legislative and the judiciary with the President holding some paramount position of precedence, and fixed terms of office for the Executive and the Members of the Legislature while in a parliamentary system, the executive power is exercised by a cabinet headed by a Prime Minister who holds office at the pleasure of the legislative body or without a fixed term. He added that the mechanism for terminating the tenure of the Members of the Cabinet and the Prime Minister is through a vote of no confidence initiated by parliament, in the same manner that the Executive can dissolve the legislative body. He pointed out that the democratic character of the system is manifested in the point of disagreement between the two bodies which is thrown to the people to decide in an election.

He opined that the advantage of a presidential system is stability in government although it is also disadvantageous in the sense that the people could not immediately replace officials whom they are dissatisfied with. On the other hand, he stated that in a parliamentary system, it is possible for the people to immediately select a new executive and a new parliament.

Mr. Bernas stressed that the purpose of dividing power into the executive, legislative and judiciary is to limit it. He added that constitutions are made to limit power and not to grant it to governments because power is inherent in them. He stated that since power is divided into three departments then it could only be exercised with the cooperation of these three departments.

He explained that the Constitution of the United States limits power horizontally by delineating the executive, legislative and the judiciary into independent bodies and, at the same time, by dividing power vertically through the separation of the local or state governments from the national government. He added that in the United States there are certain state powers which are beyond the reach of the national government and governmental powers which can only be exercised by the national government.

He observed, however, that when the Americans transplanted their system of government in the Philippines, they only instituted the horizontal distribution of power but not the vertical one. This, he added, resulted in a highly centralized government which had complete discretion as to what powers the local governments should have. He opined that although the system worked in the United States, it failed in the Philippines and the reason may be  economic because the great mass of poor Filipinos has created a situation which promoted patronage.

Finally, he concluded that whenever there is great economic inequality, liberty would always be in danger no matter how strong the guarantees are.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. SUAREZ

On Mr. Suarez' query on the disadvantage of having a presidential system primarily because of the fixed term of elected officials, Mr. Bernas stated that at present the only way to oust an unsatisfactory president is through impeachment, although he would seriously consider the institution of a system of recall as a possible alternative. He added, however, that this is not a compelling reason for him to support the presidential structure of government.

On the federal system of government, Mr. Bernas stated that the country's geographical location is a more compelling reason to give greater autonomy to local governments.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. DAVIDE

On Mr. Davide's query on the parliamentary system being more responsive but complicated and at the same time most suited to the needs of the time, Mr. Bernas stated that there is also a need for government stability, although, the possibility of institutionalizing the system of recall would make a modified parliamentary system of government favorable.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. RODRIGO

On Mr. Rodrigo's query as to how the powers of government would be delegated from the national government to autonomous local governments if ever the federal system would be adopted considering that the Constitutional provisions on the matter would be couched in general terms, Mr. Bernas stated that there should be a careful cataloguing of the powers of government to determine which of these powers would be retained by the national government and which would be delegated to the local governments.

Mr. Bernas affirmed Mr. Rodrigo's observation that the objective of giving more autonomy to the local governments may be accomplished in a presidential system provided that such is stated in the Constitution in broad terms.

COMMENTS OF MR. ABUBAKAR

Mr. Abubakar stated that the creation of an autonomous regional legislative body in Region IX has proven to be successful because the leaders and the people had become conscious of their duties and responsibilities.

COMMENTS OF MR. VILLACORTA ON MR. BERNAS' STATEMENTS

Reacting to Mr. Bernas' statements, Mr. Villacorta stated that it would be doing injustice to the parliamentary system of government to consider the Marcos government as a modified parliamentary system as the Marcos government was actually a dictatorship which was cosmeticized by a so-called parliament and a Prime Minister who was actually appointed by Mr. Marcos rather than elected by parliament which under no circumstances could be considered to have had a semblance of being one.  

In weighing the merits of both the presidential and parliamentary forms of government, Mr. Villacorta maintained that one should consider that the political culture of the Filipino has a propensity towards authoritarianism and that the public in general seems to be attracted to a strong national leader. He suggested that the question the farmers of the new Constitution should ask is: which form of government would best reduce the possibility that another dictator might emerge?

On Mr. Bernas' observation on patronage as the overriding factor in Philippine politics, Mr. Villacorta opined that adoption of either the parliamentary or presidential system without meaningful changes in the electoral process will not successfully reduce the patronage system. He suggested that the electoral systems of European countries could be looked into.

Finally, on the view that the 1935 Constitution is the best working draft since it was the only one duly ratified by the people, Mr. Villacorta urged his colleagues to consider the conscious or unconscious conditioning of its framers to tailor said Constitution along the ideals of the American presidential system, in order to ensure its approval by the U.S. Government.

MR. TINGSON'S CLARIFICATORY QUESTIONS TO MR. BERNAS

In reply to Mr. Tingson's query on whether the characterization in 1971 of the parliamentary system as more responsive to the needs of the Filipino people would not apply to the presidential form of government, Mr. Bernas believed that the 1971 Constitutional Convention considered the parliamentary system as more responsive.

On whether the saying "Nothing is politically right that is morally wrong" could apply to all forms of government, Mr. Bernas stated that the form itself does not characterize the government as moral or immoral, rather, it is more of the uses to which the form of government is put.

COMMENTS OF MR. VILLEGAS

Mr. Villegas stated that economic development is the most immediate concern of any national government and that he is attracted to a form of government that tries to combine stability and responsiveness. He agreed that President Marcos never gave the modified parliamentary system a chance to work.

He advanced as a tentative view that the country should try to emulate the French system which has a very strong President while having a parliamentary system. This is the way to address some of the roots of poverty which have a lot to do with patronage and lack of political will which can be mobilized by a strong national leadership.

Mr. Villegas stated that he is also attracted to a unitary form of government, that it is misleading to talk about autonomy, the country being plagued with regionalism and is not ready for federalism. He suggested decentralization of authority, instead of autonomy, to allow local governments to take care of what they can competently solve in their respective regions. Thus, he would also favor enlightened paternalism which in Japan, Singapore and Korea has combined its favorable factors with the modern factors of industrial progress.

COMMENTS OF MR. GARCIA

Mr. Garcia stated that his concern is not so much on the form but on the basic problems of poverty, hunger, and land. He said this is basically a problem of power and of participation in the political decision-making by sectors of society, particularly the farmers, the workers, the urban poor and the fishermen. He therefore opined that the essential question to consider is what form or system will allow the people to have a better say in or consultation with government.

MR. BENGZON'S INQUIRIES

In reply to Mr. Bengzon's query on whether the system of recall could also produce instability in the government, Mr. Bernas stated that it would depend on the terms of the recall.

As to whether it would be better to liberalize the mode of impeachment, Mr. Bernas stated that since recall is exercised not by the parliamentary body but by the electorate, it is superior to impeachment in terms of popularity. However, the recall process would be more expensive.

On the regionalization of certain powers and specifically on whether Mr. Bernas would agree that the Constitution ensures the freedom of the people in the barrios to determine and decide for themselves the solutions to their particular problems, the latter agreed on the importance of people participation and refraining from over-paternalism which kills initiative and growth.

COMMENTS OF MR. TADEO

Mr. Tadeo urged consideration of a form of government that will ensure greater participation to the common man. He maintained that there should be people power where the people really exercise power, especially political power, otherwise, whether denominated presidential or parliamentary form of government, it will remain as an elite democracy.  

MR. NATIVIDAD'S QUERY TO MR. BERNAS

In reply to Mr. Natividad's inquiry as to what devices other countries have resorted to, to avoid the destabilizing condition in a parliamentary system wherein the Members of the Cabinet sponsor the programs which they themselves implement, Mr. Bernas observed that it would be difficult to use as a starting point Mr. Natividad's experience under the semi-parliamentary system where the legislators enjoyed power not so much because it was parliamentary system but because they shared in the overwhelming executive power wielded over anybody else, a situation which does not hold in other real parliamentary systems. He opined that the problems encountered under such experience could not take place in parliaments which do not have the overwhelming support of an omnipotent leader.

MR. BACANI'S INQUIRIES

Mr. Bacani proposed that economic benefit should not be used as a primary criterion of responsiveness.

Responding to Mr. Bacani’s questions, namely:

1. On which form of government, merely on the basis of its ability to safeguard equality and promote participation by the people, would be more responsive, Mr. Bernas pointed out that for as long as there is no measure of economic equality, all other equalities or liberties become ephemeral because their protection depends on economic balance. Mr. Bernas also stressed that in drafting a constitution, the values to be protected must be identified, a system to promote and protect them must be identified.

Mr. Bacani proposed that economic benefit should not be used as a primary criterion of responsiveness.

2. On whether a federal government would run counter to the growth of national consciousness at this stage of national development, Mr. Bernas stated that the building of strong individuals precedes the building of a strong unity and, corollarily, to have a strong government, there is need to strengthen local governments.

3. On whether a country can have both parliamentary and federal forms of government, Mr. Bernas stated that Malaysia and Germany have these types of government.

ADJOURNMENT OF SESSION

On motion of Mr. Rama, duly seconded and there being no objection, the Chair declared the session adjourned until three o'clock in the afternoon of the following day.

It was 6:28 p.m.

I hereby certify to the correctness of the foregoing.

(SGD.) FLERIDA RUTH P. ROMERO
Secretary-General

ATTESTED:

(SGD.) CECILIA MUÑOZ PALMA
                  President

Approved on June 4, 1986