Why upset the apple cart
When former president Rodrigo Duterte finished his term, he left 46 bills that Congress had referred to him unsigned. That would seem to be a dereliction of duty, but it’s happened during previous leadership changes, too. So it’s not an uncommon thing. Mind you, a large number of the 46 bills were local, so of not much consequence to the nation. But ones of national importance are. In the case of the Duterte-Marcos turnover, there were 24 bills of national importance.
I suspect a primary reason they were left unsigned was because the outgoing president had insufficient time to review them in the depth needed to concur with them. Another reason, which happens normally even during a presidential term, is that the president doesn’t fully support the bill, but doesn’t feel strongly opposed enough to veto it, so just lets it lapse into law after 30 days.
The new President is left with the task of deciding if he will sign those 24, veto some, or just allow the 30 days, or less to pass and become law. It mostly will be less because the 30 days is from submission of the bill to the President’s office, not 30 days from ascension to power. So, where it matters, he has only a few days to decide on these nationally important laws. He may, after a quick assessment, decide this isn’t a law that fits into his program and veto it, as he did with the Bulacan Airport City. Mind you that veto is only for the greater metropolis, not the airport itself. That still gets incentives. He also vetoed the bill creating the Philippine Transportation Safety Board and the tax exemptions for honoraria, allowances, and other benefits of workers rendering service during the election period. On that one, he wisely decided that it was better to give financial aid instead. He also vetoed the grant of franchise to the Davao Light and Power Company, the charter of the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel, and the Transportation Safety Board Act. On the others, maybe he just trusted Congress to know what it is doing and allowed those bills to lapse into law.
Over the years since 1986, at least 175 bills have lapsed into law following leadership transition. It’s become an accepted custom — until now. Senators Alan Peter and Pia Cayetano were upset with the vaping law and threatened to take it to the Supreme Court (why the Supreme Court immediately, doesn’t any legal matter go to a lower court first?) questioning if the practice of allowing a bill passed in a previous Congress and not signed by the outgoing president can legally lapse into law under an incoming president.
If the court agrees with them that it couldn’t, that would mean that the 12 other bills President Marcos Jr. allowed to lapse into law would no longer be valid either. Maybe all the other ones in the past, too, would no longer have legal protection. I mean that’s only logical, isn’t it? That means Republic Act No. 11901 or the Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development Financing Enhancement Act that aims to provide farmers and fisherfolks from rural areas greater access to credit to improve their income and productivity—a much-needed reform post-pandemic—would be canceled. As would other significant bills that lapsed into law, such as RA No. 11930 or the Anti-Online Sexual Abuse and Exploitation of Children Act and RA No. 11909 making the validity of birth, death, and marriage certificates permanent. The efforts of Congress to provide more severe penalties for the indiscriminate discharge of firearms, especially by members of the military and law enforcement agencies under RA No. 11926 would also go to naught. As would the establishment of the Inter-Agency Council for Development and Competitiveness of Philippine Digital Workforce under RA No. 11927, and the creation of the Philippine Creative Industry Development Council under RA No. 11904 would all be canceled, too. The country would benefit from all these laws. Congress would have to start all over again.
An accepted system that’s been in place for 34 years would be thrown out the window. All the work of an outgoing Congress would be negated because two senators object to one law.
If they truly believe one out of 175 bills is unacceptable, then they have a simple choice — submit a new bill of their liking to the new Senate for the senators as a whole to consider. The House, too, as it requires both houses to agree on a bill before it can become a law. Surely that’s the simple solution to their concern. And it doesn’t upset established customs.
Email: [email protected]
MORE ‘LIKE IT IS’
