Supreme Court E-Library
Information At Your Fingertips

  View printer friendly version

CALL TO ORDER

At 3:22 p.m., the President of the Constitutional Commission, the Honorable Cecilia Muñoz Palma, called the session to order.

NATIONAL ANTHEM AND PRAYER

The National Anthem was played followed by a prayer led by Ms. Felicitas Aquino, to wit:

Almighty Father, in whose hands lies the destiny of people and nations; we implore your healing grace on a world torn by strife and man's inhumanity to man.

Grant your wisdom, strength and courage, for us to be able to work for the preservation of civil liberties and the upholding of human rights, to strive for a more equitable distribution of the country's wealth and resources, and to be on the side of the poor, the exploited and the victims of injustice.

To this task, we commit ourselves in the name of Your Son, Jesus Christ, and the power of the Holy Spirit.

Amen.

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

With 43 Members present, the Chair declared the presence of a quorum.

The following Members appeared after the Roll Call: 

Alonto, A. D.	Guingona, S. V. C.
Calderon, J. D.	Natividad, T. C.
Garcia, E. G.

READING AND APPROVAL OF THE JOURNAL

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

However, on motion of Mr. Sarmiento, there being no objection, the reading of the Journal was dispensed with.

On motion of Mr. Bernas, there being no objection, the Body approved a correction of the Journal by changing the words "these three" to "at least two" on page 14, third paragraph, line 8 thereof.

Thereafter, there being no further correction, the Body approved the Journal of the previous session as corrected.

REFERENCE OF BUSINESS

On motion of Mr. Rama 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. 30, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE CREATION OF ADDITIONAL COMMITTEES

Introduced by Honorable Suarez, Tadeo and Jamir

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

Proposed Resolution No. 31, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE USE OF THE 1973 CONSTITUTION AS THE WORKING DRAFT IN THE EVENT THAT THE PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT IS CHOSEN BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Introduced by Honorable Suarez, Tadeo and Jamir

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

Proposed Resolution No. 32, entitled:

RESOLUTION PROPOSING THE USE OF THE 1935 CONSTITUTION AS THE WORKING DRAFT IN THE EVENT THAT THE PRESIDENTIAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT IS CHOSEN BY THE COMMISSION

Introduced by Honorable Suarez, Tadeo and Jamir

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

COMMUNICATION
Communication No. 2 — Constitutional Commission of 1986

Communication from Mr. Justice Porfirio V. Sison, President of the Philippine Constitution Association, transmitting a draft constitution prepared by the Philippine Constitution Association

TO THE STEERING COMMITTEE

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

On motion of Mr. Rama, there being no objection, the Body proceeded to the Unfinished Business, which was the continuation of the free-wheeling discussion on the form of government.

Thereafter, on motions made, the Chair recognized the Members for their respective turn on the floor.

MR. VILLACORTA'S REACTION TO THE OBSERVATIONS OF MESSRS. GARCIA AND TADEO

Adverting to Messrs. Garcia and Tadeo's observations on constitutionalizing people power in the different branches of government, Mr. Villacorta proposed that the Body consider incorporating in the Articles on the Legislative a provision on multi-sectoral representation from the different sectors of society which shall include, among others, the farmers, workers, cultural communities, women, teachers, professionals and students who shall elect representatives from among themselves.

He stated that this is in response to the clamor to enshrine people power in the Constitution

INTERPELLATION OF MR. RODRIGO

In reply to Mr. Rodrigo's query on the mechanics of electing the sectoral representatives, Mr. Villacorta stated offhand that the sectoral representatives could be elected from among the members of the respective sectors, a procedure which, although may not have been experimented by any other country, could be an innovation consistent with the unique revolution the country went through. He explained that his proposed resolution on the matter would pave the way for determining the number of seats, mechanics of election and other relevant details.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. SUAREZ

In reply to Mr. Suarez' query premised on the hypothesis that the democratic system is veering away from what may be considered elite democracy, Mr. Villacorta affirmed that it would be possible for simple people to be part of the government.

MR. DAVIDE'S QUERY

Replying to Mr. Davide's query, Mr. Villacorta affirmed that multi-sectoral representation could brought down to the level of the local governments. Anent this and specifically on the matter of classifying the sectoral identity of a person who may belong to two sectors as when a lawyer is also a farmer, Mr. Villacorta opined that in such a case the person could make a choice and that, having made a choice, he would be subsequently free to go back and represent the sector to which he belonged. Mr. Davide, however, commented on the dangers of switching from one sector to another which, Mr. Villacorta agreed, was well taken. 

On the representation of the tribes within the cultural minorities, Mr. Villacorta stated that they would have to work it out among themselves. On the apportionment of seats in the National Assembly, Mr. Villacorta stated that it would be on the basis of population but agreed that each Congress should have flexibility on the matter. He also agreed that all sectors should be given their fair share of representation in order to make democracy real, genuine and participatory.

MR. SARMIENTO’S REMARKS

In relation to popular democracy, Mr. Sarmiento invited attention to the fact that he had filed a Resolution to incorporate in the new Constitution a provision requiring the government to respect and promote the right of the people freely to participate directly at all levels of decision-making and to encourage the formation and to respect the autonomy of authentic, popular or grassroots organizations or movements at local, regional and national levels.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. SARMIENTO ON MR. BERNAS' REMARKS

Mr. Sarmiento then requested Mr. Bernas to yield to interpellations on his remarks during the previous session.

Thereafter, replying to the question on patronage as one of the arguments against a presidential government, Mr. Bernas clarified that his statement was that the economic situation or great inequality in a nation encourages patronage such that the situation will be the same whether in a presidential or parliamentary form of government. He stated that political revolution must be distinguished from social revolution. He recalled that the French Revolution had three objectives, namely: Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. During the February Revolution the country achieved liberty and to some degree fraternity, yet, equality is still to be achieved. Without equality, he opined that patronage will be present.

On whether equality will be achieved with mass based representation, Mr. Bernas stated that equality to be achieved must be emphasized as a value which the Constitution must protect. The Constitution, he added, must create the structures to protect it and one such structure is greater mass representation.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. RIGOS ON MR. VILLACORTA'S STATEMENT

On the mechanics of the election of sectoral representatives, Mr. Villacorta stated that they will be provided, not by the legislature, but by the Constitutional Commission.

Specifically, on Mr. Rigos' concern on the number of sectoral representatives which could increase now and then and has to reckon with the difficulty of amending the Constitution, Mr. Villacorta responded that the provision could be such that the number of sectoral representatives will be flexible.

On whether Mr. Suarez' earlier interpellation was an indication that the Communist Party will be one of the sectoral representations, Mr. Villacorta replied that his impression was that Mr. Suarez was referring to Ka Joma not as a member of the Communist Party. Replying then to the query on the meaning of equality in the Constitution, Mr. Bernas stated that the concept is not mathematical equality or equality in absolute terms but that everyone should have at least the minimum required to live in dignity. He stressed that democracy should include a guarantee for freedom from hunger and want.

On whether the Constitution should go further than just giving equal opportunity or whether it would be necessary to include provisions in the Constitution to ensure this freedom, Mr. Bernas explained that there should be equality of opportunity by according the disadvantaged more support in order to overcome the inequalities. Mr. Bernas noted that it is more a problem of structure. He recalled that the 1935 Constitution provided for social justice but equalization of opportunity was not achieved and although the provision was expanded in the 1971-73 Constitution, the legislature has yet to implement it.

As to whether such a Constitutional provision will also ensure equal opportunity to those who are too lazy to work, Mr. Bernas opined that there should be some penalties for those who are not willing to work.

Finally, Mr. Bernas agreed with Mr. Rodrigo that the principle should not only be equality before the law, but that those who have less in life should have more in law.    

MRS. ROSARIO BRAID'S REMARKS

At this juncture, Mrs. Rosario Braid posed the question on the form of government that would be more responsive to the needs of the majority who live in subhuman conditions. She observed that the gap is not only economic but also social and cultural with a small modern educated western-oriented elite on one hand and on the other the vast majority who live in traditional cultures. She stated that total development can happen only if there is participation by the citizenry with the learning systems encouraging people through political education and social awareness.

INTERPELLATION OF MS. TAN ON MR. BERNAS' REMARKS

On Ms. Tan's question whether equality of opportunity could be brought about by legislation by the Constitution, Mr. Bernas stated that the Commission's task is to choose the values to be emphasized and to design a structure that will enable the nation to fortify these values. He explained that inasmuch as the legislative body creates the policy and allocates the financial resources, the legislative system should deliver the maximum benefits to the people who need them. He observed that inequality of opportunity is rooted in inequality of educational opportunity and that education for the masses which will contribute to their upliftment must be emphasized. He stressed that the Constitutional body should create that structure which will deliver the benefits.

MR. BACANI'S SUGGESTION

At this juncture, Mr. Bacani suggested, that perhaps the Constitution can pave the way for the formulation of a legislation that would consider as a criterion the value of the property an individual owns.

Elaborating thereon, he suggested that in the composition of the legislature only 5 percent may come from the high-level income group and 70 percent from the low-income bracket. The majority, in this instance, will be given opportunities, privileges and possessions like those enjoyed by the few on top. He stated that he does not believe in sectoral representation but there must be a common concern shared by the majority who will aspire to realize that equality.

MR. TADEO'S CLARIFICATORY STATEMENTS

By way of clarifying his stand on certain issues earlier raised by his colleagues, Mr. Tadeo made the following points:

On democratic representation, it should be on the basis of proportional representation. If the farmers' block should form the greatest number, they must be so represented;

As to who will choose the sectoral representatives, the sector concerned must be given that opportunity;

As to who will represent the unemployed, they can be represented by the workers;   

For those who have multiple occupations and who enjoy the freedom to choose the sector they want to represent, the primary occupation of the individual shall determine the sector to which he belongs;

On the matter of economic equality, in relation to property ownership, land, being God's creation for all, true land reform should enable the farmers to uplift themselves; and

For those too lazy to work, there must be a cause for such laziness.

MR. FOZ' INQUIRY

At this juncture, Mr. Foz inquired on the status of the collation of preferences for membership the 15 committees, in reply to which the Chair stated that while the complete listing had been received, the Committee on Rules has not yet submitted its report on the number of Committees and actual membership.

Thereupon, in reply to the Chair's query, Mr. Romulo informed the Body that the report will be submitted on Friday morning, June 6.

Thereafter, replying to Mr. Foz' inquiries, Mr. Romulo affirmed that the report will be submitted for action by the Body, the Committee's role being recommendatory.

In this connection, Mr. Foz suggested that, instead of discussing the report of the Committee on Rules in open session, the Members of the Commission discuss the proposed Rules in caucus at which the Members would be free to propose amendments.

In reply, Mr. Romulo agreed that the suggestion would expedite action on the Rules but that he could not speak for the Chairman.

INQUIRY OF MR. SUAREZ

At this juncture, Mr. Suarez invited attention to a resolution, which he, with Messrs. Tadeo and Jamir submitted, calling for the creation of the Committee on Labor, Committee on Land Reform, Committee on Social Justice and Committee on Rural and Community Development. He requested that the Committee on Rules take up the said resolution when it meets.

Replying thereto, Mr. Sarmiento informed the Body that the Committee has discussed the matter and agreed that the number of committees would not be limited to 15 committees but expanded to include other committees suggested by the Commissioners.    

Thereupon, the Chair directed the Secretariat to furnish the Committee on Rules with copies of the corresponding resolutions.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. OPLE ON MR. VILLACORTA'S REMARKS

In reply to Mr. Ople's query relative to the principle of sectoral representation as an integral part of the 1973 Constitution, Mr. Villacorta stated that he was aware of its nominal or semantic provision, noting that what the Batasang Pambasa had under the Marcos Constitution was sectoral misrepresentation rather than representation because the sectoral representatives were not elected nor the respective sectors consulted.

Mr. Ople elucidated on the background of the selection of the sectoral representatives to the defunct Batasang Pambansa. He explained that the law provided for an electoral college composed of people capable of sympathizing with the policies of Mr. Marcos. He stated that the sectoral representatives were drawn from the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines; the farmers' sectoral representatives, from the Federation of Free Farmers identified with Mr. Luis Taruc, and that the procedure was followed for other organizations which constituted the electoral college to nominate the sectoral representatives from whom Mr. Marcos considered nominees sympathetic to his policies.

Mr. Ople then asked whether in a future electoral college for workers, the KMU will substitute for the TUCP on the same consideration of closeness to President Aquino's political thinking; that Mr. Tadeo will substitute for the Federation of Free Farmers; and that Mr. Gascon of U.P. will substitute for the Kabataang Barangay.

Mr. Ople observed that the notion that one can have a purely egalitarian structure is somewhat flawed because one should recognize the fact that society functions through leaders.

He stated that he mentioned the background experience only as an input to the proposals put forward which, in some agreeable form, could be supported in the course of the deliberations.

In reply, Mr. Villacorta acknowledged that despite the traumatic experiences under the oppressive Marcos dictatorship, Mr. Ople was open to the idea of multi-sectoral representation with some improvements. In this connection, Mr. Villacorta pointed out that under a different atmosphere, it would be an insult to the intelligence of the farmers, the fishermen and the workers to imply that they would not be able to choose from among themselves the best representatives for their respective sectors or that they would allow the more elitist among them to be their representatives.

INTERPELLATION OF MR. OPLE ON MR. BERNAS' REMARKS

Thereafter, taking a turn to interpellate Mr. Bernas on the latter's presentation on the value of equality, Mr. Ople stated that the models that emerged from the test of time had built-in thrusts toward human equality, Mr. Ople observed that in China the tendency in recent times is to allow a little more inequality by allowing some degree of differentiation and a greater diversity of incomes and class; in the Soviet Union, there is a centralized allocation of resources and five-year detailed economic objectives; and that America is dedicated to fostering growth and equality through competition, opportunity and initiative.

Asked then for his views on these models of equality, Mr. Bernas stated that he is hardly an authority on the Soviet or the Chinese system. However, he said that certain historical observations would be in order — that both China and Soviet Russia were scenes of a revolution and that the experience in Russia was that the moderates used the same structures and systems adopted by their predecessors to try to achieve the goals they wanted but their efforts were found wanting and that the process of levelling did not take place until the radicals took over after a bloody experience and so a search for something more stable took place all over again. He said the same thing happened in China. He suggested that there are certain general patterns in the historical development of the two nations which could be pondered upon and learned lessons from. He stressed that the question is whether a measure of equality and levelling for the purpose of uplifting the greatly disadvantaged could be achieved. without resorting to a bloodbath.

REMARKS OF MR. LERUM

Adverting to the previous remarks on sectoral representation in the interim Batasang Pambansa, Mr. Lerum took exception to the claim that the sectoral representatives of the interim Batasan were selected by the President. He pointed out that the Election Code of 1978 provided for the procedure of sectoral representation.    

Mr. Lerum explained that in the case of labor representatives, a delegate was chosen from among the representatives of the Sangguniang Bayan in a province and such delegate, in turn, represented that province in an election for sectoral representation. In addition, labor organizations were assigned ten delegates chosen by recognized federations, who as a result of an election at that time all came from the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines. Metro Manila was also assigned ten delegates. Thereafter, these delegates held an election from among themselves which eventually proclaimed him (Mr. Lerum) and former Assemblyman de Ocampo as representatives of the labor sector from Luzon.

Mr. Lerum denied that they were mere creatures of former President Marcos. He urged his colleagues in the Constitutional Commission to read the Journals of the interim Batasang Pambansa which he believed would bear him out on this statement. He made special mention of their opposition to Cabinet Bill No. 45 (BP Blg. 130) and Cabinet Bill No. 49 (BP Blg. 227) which in the case of the latter, resulted in the calling of a special session.

In the case of the regular Batasang Pambansa, Mr. Lerum admitted that they were presidential appointees pursuant to law but this could not be a justification for labelling them as creatures of Mr. Marcos. He said that he was never a creature of Presidents as proven in past occasions when those he did not support in the presidential elections still appointed him to government positions.

Finally, Mr. Lerum pledged his independence and that his work in the Constitutional Commission is bound by instructions from the labor sector which he represents.

SUSPENSION OF SESSION

At this juncture, the session was suspended.

It was 4:58 p.m.

RESUMPTION OF SESSION

At 5:26 p.m., the session was resumed.

On request of Mr. Rama, the Chair recognized Mr. Brocka

COMMENTS OF MR. BROCKA

Thereupon, reacting to Mr. Ople's comments on Mr. Villacorta's proposal for a multi-sectoral representation in government, Mr. Brocka opined that the proposal was brilliant because at present, the common people have something to say and the courage to say it, so it is incorrect to state that only a few representatives could articulate the people's sentiments.

In view thereof, Mr. Brocka believed that the Constitution must be simple in language for the common man to understand. He added that the Commission should change the old system and give the same priority to the discussion of the existing economic problems as pointed out by Messrs. Bernas, Tadeo and Garcia. He agreed with Mr. Bernas that the structure would come out of the values of the people

REMARKS OF MR. DE LOS REYES

Thereafter, Mr. de los Reyes observed that the Commission is inclined to give emphasis to the substance of government rather than form to truly reflect a government of the people, for the people and by the people.

On the basic issues of liberty, property, security and right to resist oppression, he stated that they should be enjoyed not only by a few but by all people. He added that they would only be experienced if exploitation is abolished, the problems of unemployment and poverty are solved, and the fear of being deprived of work, home and bread is overcome. He stressed that unless the people are provided the basic necessities of life to make them truly equal to others, liberty and; equality become transcendental guarantees. But to reach this goal, he stated that the concept of "property" must first be defined.

On the form and structure of government and the manner of electing officials, he underscored that a mechanism be devised to allow the masses to participate in the affairs of government especially when their representatives fail to do their job.

In this connection, he suggested that since multi-sectoral representation failed as pointed out by Mr. Ople, the concept of initiative as provided for in the Constitution of California should be adopted. Adverting to Article II of said Constitution, he stated that "initiative is the power of the electors to propose statutes and amendments to the Constitution and to adopt or reject them". He explained that if a representative fails to act on a proposal because of negligence or vested interest, the people them selves could legislate by presenting an initiative measure to the Secretary of State (Solicitor-General in case of the Philippines) in the form of a petition signed by state electors equivalent to 5% in the case of statutes and 8% in the case of an amendment to the State Constitution.

He also opined that the system of recall explained by Mr. Bernas could also be adopted.

Finally, he stressed that it is time to be innovative and that if the concepts of initiative and the system of recall would be incorporated in the Constitution, the people will be more politicized and could participate more effectively in the affairs of government.

REMARKS OF MR. PADILLA

Mr. Padilla stated that the Constitution must not only guarantee the rights of people but must also be an instrument for their welfare.

He stressed, however, that regardless of the form of government which the country will eventually adopt, the existing economic problems such as unemployment, poverty, and poor financial conditions will continue to burden the people and many of these problems will have to be solved by appropriate legislative measures in accordance with the fundamental law.

He recalled the changes in government from the promulgation of the Philippine Bill of 1902, the Jones Law, to the 1935 Constitution, under which the Philippines had the presidential form of government. He also stated that history will show that past Presidents were elected only for one term except for Mr. Marcos who decided to change the form of government to parliamentary through the 1971 Constitutional Convention in order to perpetuate himself in power, despite the provision in the 1935 Constitution that the maximum term of office would be eight years.

Mr. Padilla observed that because of the many supporters of former President Marcos in the 1971 Constitutional Convention, the resolution of Mr. Macapagal to prohibit reelection was not approved; and many objectionable amendments were inserted in the 1935 Constitution which resulted in infringements on the bill of rights and the granting of legislative powers to Mr. Marcos, making him a stronger president.

He fervently hoped that the Commission would be able to come up with a draft-constitution which will serve the best interests of the people; ensure popular democracy; promote truth, justice and freedom; provide for a stable government, and unite the people.

In this regard, he stated that he favors the presidential system of government with its proper checks and balances, using for the .purpose the 1935 Constitution as the starting point, subject to improvements and amendments based on recent political experiences, and the granting of autonomy to local governments. He also stated that the extent and scope of this autonomy must be properly determined.  

In conclusion, he stressed that the purpose of a Constitution as the foundation of government is not to limit the exercise of its power but rather to protect and defend the people's rights and to serve their best interests.

MOTION OF MR. MONSOD

At this juncture, Mr. Monsod moved, in connection with the motion to create a committee to conduct public hearings on the form of government made during the previous session, to amend such motion so as to reflect the following: 1) to constitute said committee as the Committee on Public Hearings with the power to create subcommittees; and 2) to expand the subject matter to be taken up during such hearings.

MANIFESTATION OF MR. AZCUNA

Mr. Azcuna manifested his agreement to Mr. Monsod's motion and he informed the Body that he filed a resolution for the purpose so that the aspirations, values and ideals of the people could also be known during the conduct of such hearings.

MR. RODRIGO'S COMMENT TO MR. MONSOD'S MOTION

Mr. Rodrigo observed that the creation of the committee as suggested by Mr. Monsod will render the other committees useless, cause problems on the availability of funds, and may delay plenary deliberations due to lack of quorum as the Members may be out on public hearings.

COMMENTS OF MRS. NIEVA

Mrs. Nieva expressed agreement with Mr. Monsod's suggestion stating that the task of the Committee is mainly organizational. She suggested that the Committee as suggested by Mr. Monsod be created immediately.

In response thereto, Mr. Rodrigo suggested that the organizational task be handled by the Secretariat which is likewise in a position to know the availability of funds for such purpose. Mr. Rodrigo stressed that he was not against the proposal but stated that more time should be alloted to study the matter, to which Mr. Monsod agreed.

COMMENTS OF MR. SARMIENTO

Mr. Sarmiento stated that Mr. Monsod's proposal would pave the way for the creation of a supercommittee at the expense of other committees. He suggested that the matter be deferred until the Rules shall have been formulated.

MOTION OF MR. FOZ

At this juncture, Mr. Foz moved that the Commission meet in caucus at 2:00 p.m. on Friday, June 6, 1986.

However, Mr. Rigos stated that if the Committee on Rules would be ready with its report on Friday morning, then the caucus could be held in the morning and the Commission could meet in plenary session in the afternoon.

Mr. Foz agreed to have his motion amended by Mr. Rigos' proposal if the Committee could be ready with its report in the morning.

COMMENTS OF MR. SUMULONG

Mr. Sumulong, as Chairman of the Committee on Rules suggested that the creation of the committee be deferred as it might result in duplication of functions since under the Provisional Rules there are standing committees on executive power and legislative power.

He stated that to expedite the work of the Commission, it may use either the 1935 or the 1973 Constitution as a working draft defending upon its choice of whether to adopt a presidential or a parliamentary form of government.

COMMENT OF MR. TINGSON

Mr. Tingson underscored the fact that the Members of the Commission were appointed on the basis of their expertise. He stated that it was unnecessary to spend for public hearings since proposals are being received by the Members everyday, in reply to which, Mr. Monsod stated that while he had agreed to the deferment, if Mr. Tingson's logic is followed, then there will be no need of public hearings at all.

SUGGESTION OF MR. REGALADO

Mr. Regalado suggested that since the matter involved logistics, the caucus should not only include the report of the Committee on Rules, but also that of the Committee on Finance and Personnel.

RESTATEMENT OF MR. FOZ' MOTION ATTESTED

The Chair restated Mr. Foz’ motion for as amended by Messrs. Rigos, Regalado and the Body approved to hold a caucus after the morning session through lunch until the afternoon on Friday, June 6, 1986 to take up the report of the Committee on Rules and also that of the Committee Finance and Personnel if there is still time.

ADJOURNMENT OF SESSION

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

It was 6:46 p.m.

I hereby certify to the correctness of the going.

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

ATTESTED:

(SGD.) CECILIA MUÑOZ PALMA
              President

Approved on June 5, 1986