Because of the growing worldwide interest in our surging economy, retired Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna, a member of the 1986 Constitutional Commission and incumbent chancellor of the Philippine Judicial Academy, dissected four controversial decisions on the economic provisions of the Constitution during his recent lecture at the Ateneo Law School.
How did Twitter lead to dubious media reports that 37-year-old IT lawyer Al Parreño’s appointment to the Commission on Elections was unconstitutional? Why do reporters corroborate sources out of paranoia, yet are hesitant to check the text of the Constitution that we are required to read in high school?
Sabah has once again become front-page material because of the move of the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu to enforce their claim to a portion of the territory. It may be good to understand what the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu are claiming. As I see it, they are not claiming political sovereignty [...]
Unconstitutional, unfair and unwise in my humble view is the resolution of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) restricting candidates for national posts (senators and party-lists) to an “aggregate total” of only 120 minutes of TV ads and 180 minutes of radio ads for all stations. Candidates for local positions were given a maximum of 60 minutes of TV ads and 90 minutes of radio ads. Due to my limited space, let me just discuss for now the TV limits on national candidates.
People get the government they deserve. What people deserve is expressed through their preferences in an election. We have been having elections since 1987 when the antidynasty provision in the Constitution first appeared, and the people have chosen, administration after administration, their preferences, dynasties and all.
The promotion of Church People’s Response strongly condemns the destruction of Tubbataha Reef and the infringement of our national sovereignty by Americans. A US Navy minesweeper ran aground on Tubbataha Reef last Jan. 17. It immediately damaged the fragile, marine resource-rich protected national park. It will take decades for the damaged reef to heal.
Let me give you a few points to ponder when considering whether or not we need to open up the economy by amending the Constitution. Because now is the time to discuss it. If we do, we can vote upon it in 2013.
The problem is not just that a dynasty-steeped Congress is not likely to pass, or even table, an anti-dynasty law. Though that is a huge problem already. Of course it won’t, the House of Representatives in particular. Why should the representatives agree to a law that forbids, or militates against, their spouses, children, brothers and sisters, cousins, and relatives to whatever degree of consanguinity from holding elective public offices too? That is shooting themselves in the head.
WHILE WE remember our departed loved ones today, All Souls Day, let us not forget another thing that is also dead or dying, one we should all love with everything we have: our Constitution. Our basic law is dying, if it is not already dead. It has been killed, or is being killed, by politicians. The dirty politicians are violating the provisions of our Constitution, principally that against political dynasties.
The politicians are at it again. They want, again, to change the Constitution, with the government’s preliminary peace agreement with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front as excuse. They said the planned establishment of the new autonomous Bangsamoro, which will replace the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, will need a constitutional amendment.
Amid the serious economic crisis engulfing the developed world, the Philippines has shown remarkable resilience. This year, our economy grew 6.3 percent in the first quarter and 5.9 percent in the second quarter. This rate of growth may slow down a bit but it is still projected to end the year at 5.5 percent, better than many Asian neighbors like Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore and Vietnam, but behind China and possibly Indonesia.
The basic, constitutional quality requirements for a chief justice are no other than “competence, integrity, probity and independence.” No one can possess all these qualities in a degree higher than all the other nominees. Not one of the nominees, for instance, can be said to possess the highest degree of competence in all fields of law.
