CONGRESSMEN belonging to the militant Makabayan bloc yesterday asked the Supreme Court (SC) to invalidate and declare as unconstitutional the version of the bill proposing the establishment of a Maharlika Investment Fund (MIF) that was approved by the House of Representatives last year before it went on a month-long holiday break.
In filing the petition for certiorari and prohibition, the lawmakers questioned President Marcos Jr.’s certification of the measure as urgent, arguing that there was no public emergency or calamity to justify the certification.
The petitioners were led by ACT Teachers party-list group Rep. France Castro, Gabriela Women’s party-list Rep. Arlene Brosas, Kabataan party-list Rep. Raoul Manuel, Bayan Muna chairperson Neri Colmenares and former Bayan Muna Rep. Carlos Isagani Zarate.
Named respondents in the petition were Marcos, Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin, and the House of Representatives.
In the petition, the petitioners asked the SC to declare the presidential certification of the Maharlika bill as urgent as “unconstitutional and void” allegedly because there was no valid basis for it.
“We ask the Honorable Court to void the presidential certification of the Maharlika bill, as well as its approval on third reading, without a printed copy of the bill’s final form distributed to the Members at least three days before it is voted upon,” the petitioners said.
They cited Article VI, Section 26 (2) of the 1987 Constitution, which states that a bill becomes a law only if it passes three readings on three separate days, except if Malacañang certifies it as an urgent measure.
The petitioners also said the certification of the Maharlika bill was done in haste, pointing out that there was no similar certification of a counterpart bill in the Senate.
This, they stressed, proved the absence of a public emergency or calamity to warrant such certification.
Besides, they also said, the words “public emergency” or “calamity” were never mentioned in the letter of certification sent to the House.
“When a President certifies a bill urgent only in one house of Congress, without finding it necessary to issue the same certification in the other house, that is a distortion and a grave abuse of discretion in the exercise of a presidential power under Article VI, Section 26 (2),” the petitioners said.
“Since the President did not certify a bill urgent in one house, the President is merely short-circuiting the legislative process in the other house. This is (a) fatal admission that there is no public emergency or calamity in the nature that triggers the activation of the exception under Article VI, Section 26 (2) of the Constitution,” they argued.
The lack of a Senate certification in December 2022, the petitioners added, also belied Malacañang’s claim that there was a need for the immediate enactment of the measure.
PROCEDURAL LAPSES
The petitioners said the approval of the Maharlika bill on third and final reading, just barely three hours after it was heavily amended and approved on second reading, indicated that members of the House voted for the passage of the measure without studying the final form of the proposed legislation as required in the Constitution.
“This rushed voting deprives them of the opportunity to scrutinize the bill and ensure that it contains all the provisions amended and agreed upon in the second reading. The Members were deprived of the opportunity to perform the constitutionally required process in the approval of a measure for no appropriate and apparent reason except that the bill was certified urgent by the President,” they said.
At least 22 sections of the Maharlika bill were amended during the period of individual amendments before it was approved on second reading.
The bill’s sponsor also inserted nine sections and deleted a penalty clause in one section.
“These last-minute amendments after approval of the bill is further proof not only on the dearth of scrutiny and study of the rushed bill, but also of the absence of public emergency or calamity that necessitates the shortcuts,” the petitioners said.
Lastly, they said the SC’s decision on the petition will provide guidance that would provide future administrations of parameters within which to act in the exercise of a power affecting a co-equal branch.
The House of Representatives passed on December 2022 House Bill No. 6608 or the Maharlika Investment Fund Act on third and final reading with 279 yes votes, six no votes and zero abstention.
Malacañang had certified the measure as urgent, paving the way for its second and third reading approvals on the same day.
The bill provides for an independent fund that shall be sourced from the investible funds of select government financial institutions, from contributions of the national government, declared dividends of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, and other sources of funds.
The Senate is currently deliberating its own version of the measure proposing the establishment of the MIF.
JAPANESE FIRMS
Marcos on Sunday night said three Japanese private firms have committed a substantial amount to the proposed MIF.
The President, in a media interview onboard PR 001 while en route to Manila from Japan, however, declined to name the three firms.
“We have some commitments, but I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to name who they are. But they have, there were already three commitments, substantial amounts that they are willing to invest in the fund. So, we can begin there,” Marcos said.
He said there were also some pledges from government institutions.
The President, during his attendance in the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland in January, has already discussed the proposed MIF which is seen to boost the country’s economic activity and provide funding for critical government infrastructure projects. — With Jocelyn Montemayor
