Home > Op-ed | To bottom

Revamp the Comelec

Revamp the Commission on Election (Comelec). This was the proposal from different groups after the said institution and some of its commissioners were involved in fraudulent transactions and the rigging of the 2004 elections. Lately, former Supreme Court Justice Hilario Davide, as an adviser to the president, recommended revamp. Davide has in fact a list of six people he recommended as Comelec commissioners incase the revamp is realized.

I believe however that any move to revamp the Comelec is useless if the people in that institution will easily succumb to the political pressure from Malacanang. I believe that the realistic proposal would be on how the Comelec should maintain itself as an independent constitutional body. We may be able to change the commissioners but it can be likened to be the same dogs with different collars. They are the same people that easily succumb to the interests of Malacanang rather than for the realization of its constitutional mandates and as an independent institution.

With its alleged fraud involvement, some sectors claimed the present Comelec is no different from the Comelec during the time of former Pres. Ferdinand Marcos. During the Marcos period, the Comelec had served as rubber stamp, or correctly termed stamp pad, as it legalized the fraudulent acts of that administration. That is why Marcos and his cronies in power for long years until they were removed via the Peoples Power I. The Comelec serving as stamp pad of the present administration is not only a possibility but a big possibility. The revamp is also a cosmetic that would serve to weaken the people’s call for structural changes.

I see the present Comelec being used by Malacanang to validate its signature campaign for charter change. The present constitution allows three methods in introducing changes - both amendments and revision.

First, through Constituent Assembly (ConAss) where the present Congress through the ¾ votes of all its members can transform itself into a ConAss that would introduce the changes.

Second, through a Constitutional Convention (ConCon) where can be called either by 2/3 votes of all the members of Congress, by a majority vote of all members of Congress asked the people in a plebiscite whether or not to call for a Constitutional Convention to introduce changes to the constitution.

Third, through people’s initiative with a petition of at least 12% of the total numbers of registered voters but every legislative district should be represented by at least 3% of the registered voters.

Constitutionalists claim that revision, and even amendments, of the constitution can be done only through the first and the second. The third can be used only to amend the constitution. Constitutionalists add that partial changes to the constitution can be considered revision if it affects the substantial governmental systems, which include the changes from presidential to parliamentary. If that is the case, the present people’s initiative aiming to introduce substantial change from presidential to parliamentary then is improper. In fact in a 1997 case, the Supreme Court headed by then Davide (and in fact wrote the decision on the case) claimed that the people’s initiative for changing the constitution needs an enabling law on how to go with the initiative. From that period to the present, there was no law yet enacted by Congress on how to go with the people’s initiative as a mode of introducing changes to the Constitution. This point was raised by former Constitutional Commissioner Joaquin Bernas when Malacanang, despite its denial, has been funding and involve in the on-going people’s initiative.

Media reports even as far as the provinces, which I confirmed from my reliable sources, proved that the Comelec provincial and city offices work hand in hand with the DILG in gathering signature and verification. This move of gathering signature, aside from manipulations involved, is useless and inutile as there is no enabling law passed by Congress for this step of introducing changes to the constitution.But why is Chacha being pushed by the Comelec and the DILG? Why are they using government funding despite the absence of an enabling law? Your guess is good as mine. It is a move to move away the focus of the people from the real issue: the legitimacy of the present administration.#

Post your comments, reactions to this article

Home > Op-ed | Back to top