CHIEF presidential legal counsel Juan Ponce Enrile yesterday proposed a two-fold increase in the current number of senators, citing the need to adjust the number of lawmakers to match the country’s growing population.
Speaking as a resource person during the hearing of the Senate committee on constitutional amendments and revision of codes, Enrile said there is a need to double the current 24 membership of the Senate because “at the time of the adoption of the 1935 Constitution, we are only 12 million people.”
Under Enrile’s proposal, he said out of the 48 senators, 16 will “go out every two years to be elected by the people” so that “new, fresh and modernized minds will enter the system” who can contribute to the intellectual or academic capabilities of the sitting senators.
The former president of the Senate said it was the 1935 Constitution that mandated that 24 senators be seated, but it was the 1987 Constitution that required that half of them be elected every six years.
“They did not understand why under the 1935 Constitution, the wise men of the Philippines… ginawa nilang (they placed the number at) 24 but every two years, (they are) exposed to the mandate of the people… eight of these 24 and 16 will remain standing all the time,” he said.
He said the reason for changing eight senators every two years was to make sure that two thirds of the senators are “in place at any given time without any interregnum.”
In that case, Enrile said, unforeseen events such as war, invasion, rebellion, times of emergencies, pandemic, and epidemic, the 16 senators can be depended on to maintain the government.
Enrile was invited as a resource person by committee chairperson Sen. Robin Padilla, who has been holding hearings in pursuit of his proposal to amend the 1987 Constitution, which he said is no longer applicable to the present settings since a lot of changes have taken place over the past 35 years since it was ratified.
1935 CONSTITUTION
Also during yesterday’s committee hearing, Enrile said the 1987 Constitution that the country is now using as a master guide for the application of laws was crafted by “ideologues” who supposedly included many provisions that weakened the government “and enhanced and advanced the goal of the CPP (Communist Party of the Philippines), NPA (New People’s Army) and the NDF (National Democratic Front).
He suggested that the country revert to the “brief, simple, and easy to understand” 1935 Constitution since, he said, the 1987 Constitution complicated the provisions of the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions.
He said the crafting of the 1935 Constitution was led by the late Claro M. Recto who was assisted by delegates chosen by the Filipino people, adding that even the US approved it.
The 1973 Constitution, on the other hand, was the product of a constitutional convention which was chaired by the late Diosdado Macapagal, a bar topnotcher who later become president of the country.
Enrile alleged the 1986 “freedom constitution” was crafted only by Neptali Gonzales and the late president Corazon Aquino without consulting stakeholders, and then the 1987 Constitution was made by whom he described as mostly “ideologues” and was later approved by the people through a plebiscite.
“(The 1987 Constitution was) presented sa bayan in a plebiscite, pero alam mo naman, ‘yung naging presidente tanyag ‘yan, parang diyos ‘yun, parang santa, ‘amen’ ang taumbayan. Yan ang nangyari. Pero ‘yung mga ideologues na sumama sa 16-man council kung anu-anong provisions and nilagay to weaken the government of the Republic of the Philippines that should protect the people, and enhanced and advanced the goal of the CPP, NPA and the NDF (The 1987 Constitution was presented to the people through a plebiscite, but as we all know, the one who became president [that time] was so popular, was like god, like a saint, so the people just said ‘Amen.’ That’s what happened. But the ideologues who joined the 16-man council included so many provisions to weaken the government of the Republic of the Philippines that should protect the people, and enhance, and advanced the goal of the CPP, NPA, and NDF),” Enrile said.
Enrile said if lawmakers really want to change the Constitution, the best system would be the system used for the crafting of the 1935 Constitution.
“First, my (proposal is we) go back, that is my preference. I’m not binding anybody to go back to the 1935 Constitution. Or at the very least if we want to change it immediately, go to the 1973 Constitution,” he added.
He said it is also better to restore some provisions of the 1935 or 1973 Constitution which allows the President to declare martial law if there is an “imminent threat” of invasion, insurrection, rebellion, unlike Section 18, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution where martial law can be declared only while these events are occurring.
He said he is also in favor of clarifying the provision of the Constitution on the issue of the Senate and the House of Representatives “voting separately.”
“Let us decide separately on any national issue of grave import. It cannot be joint voting, magiging minority ang Senado (the Senate will become the minority). That is part of the checks and balances of the Constitution if you do not know yet,” he said.
Enrile said he is also in favor of the return to the system where all presidential appointees, including members of the Judiciary, are subjected to the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments so Congress can exact accountability for the public funds it appropriates.
