“It is time we put sanity into our political system”
If the President wants to amend or even revise the Constitution, and I believe he wants to, he should come out forthrightly and endorse it.
He should place his immense political capital on the table, and not just let surrogates, whether in Congress or the so-called PI advocates, handle the undertaking.
Let me recall a failed attempt in 1998, when President Joseph Estrada, coming back from a trip to Thailand and seeing first-hand the massive foreign investments there, suddenly sought a Manila Hotel forum for an important announcement: Charter change, specifically on the economic provisions.
Without any pre-planning, Erap gambled his huge political capital.
That was August 1998. Since the president had declared a major policy decision, it was up to us in his Cabinet to defend it, and see it through.
The initial reading by the pollsters was unfavorable to Charter change, with the interventionist Cardinal Sin and former President Cory Aquino declaring their vehement opposition.
Still, I convinced Erap to launch a major communications campaign to stem the tide of an initial 27 percent approval versus a 73 percent disapproval and uncertainty.
We assigned Cabinet members and undersecretaries to hold nationwide meetings with different sectors to explain the need for foreign capital.
The biggest opposition then, and even now, was on allowing foreigners to buy land. But many began to realize the need to open up utilities and natural resource exploitation to attract foreign capital.
Then USec Ronnie Puno of DILG (President Erap named himself DILG secretary, a feat similar to President Marcos Jr. initially being agriculture secretary) launched an advertising campaign in tri-media.
On Nov 26, 1998, Estrada even constituted a preparatory commission headed by retired Chief Justice Andres Narvasa to recommend Constitutional reforms, this despite the opposition to his declared initiative.
For four intensive campaign months from September till December of 1998, we saw the tide slowly turning. A dipstick on the issue of “Concord” or Constitutional Correction for Development before the holidays showed that opposition was getting neutralized.
Then in mid-January 1999, again without adequate consultation, President Estrada did an about face. He suddenly gave up on his “Concord.”
An evening after, I had a one-on-one talk with the president, and asked why he did a volte face. His simple explanation: too much opposition, especially from Cardinal Sin and the Catholic Church.
I told him the “opposition” led by the cardinal had “tasted blood” with his decision.
“Kaya pala nila kayong pa-atrasin,” I said, and added, “hindi kayo tatantanan ng mga iyan.”
The President who acted often impulsively, frowned and simply dismissed my warning.
Two years later, Edsa Dos transpired.
I hope it is not because of the memory of Erap’s failed attempt, as well as those of FVR and GMA, that the president prefers to let the House, which obviously fathered the people’s initiative, and now a compromising Senate, to take the onus of reforming the Constitution which has always the same vociferous defenders mouthing the same arguments.
Erap’s fall from the presidency was not because of the failed Concord but because of reasons I will no longer recount in this article.
Clearly, the forces who conspired against him and who from the very beginning disliked him saw he could so easily cavil to pressure and surrender his political will.
President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr., after many years in government — as congressman, governor, and senator – surely has realized that although he gained power under the system foisted by the 1987 Constitution, our prosperity and the welfare of the many now suffering from unequal opportunity requires systemic change.
Which is why, rather than being hounded by Erap’s failed exercise of political will, he should show that he is made of sterner stuff.
In the case of former President Duterte, his economic team and other advisers warned that a shift to a federal system was financially disastrous for the nation.
So the present leadership should go back to the drawing board, marshal the proper arguments and propose sensible, easily understood revisions on why the present political system should not be allowed to continue.
It is time we put sanity into our political system.
The president has recognized this need for political reforms, but wants the economic provisions tackled first. I submit otherwise.
Politics is something the ordinary folk comprehend better than economics, and with a well-crafted communications plan, I submit the president should then go around the country as in an election campaign, and win the people towards reforming a confused, confusing and reactive fundamental law.
As we have written before, constitutional reform would be his greatest and most enduring legacy for the benighted land.
