Robin, Rodriguez push amendment of Constitution

By Jeanne Michael Penaranda

PASAY CITY/QUEZON CITY – The chairman of the House Committee on Constitutional Amendments pressed on plans to amend the 1987 Philippine Constitution as his counterpart in the Senate, Sen. Robinhood Padilla also pushed bills seeking constitutional amendments in the Senate.

Rodriguez said the existing economic restrictions in the 1987 Constitution have counteracted the structural reforms that were introduced to further liberalize the Philippine economy.

In his sponsorship speech on the Resolution of Both Houses No. 6 calling for a constitutional convention to amend the Constitution, Cagayan de Oro City Representative Rufus Rodriguez said despite the passage of the amendments to the Retail Trade Liberalization Act, the Foreign Investment Act and Public Service Act in the previous administration, the reality is that constitutional limitations contravene the objectives of these laws.

In the Senate, Senator Padilla said no matter how many laws facilitating the entry of foreign investments to the Philippines have been passed, they may all face obstacles if the corresponding economic provisions in the Constitution are not amended.

Padilla, chairman of the Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes, said foreign investors may even hold back if they see the constitutionality of such laws being challenged before the Supreme Court.

“Napakaganda ng batas na ginawa nila pero hanggang itong mga batas na ito sumasalubong at sumasalpok sa ating Constitution, lagi itong questionable. Yan ba pwede nating ibenta sa ating mga foreign investor? Papaano natin makumbinsi ang foreign investor kung ang kanilang pera ay mapupunta sa question dahil pong ito ba ay pinapayagan ng Constitution o hindi (We have passed very good laws for foreign investments but so long as they are perceived to go against the Constitution, they will be questionable. Thus, can we attract foreign investments? How can we convince foreign investors their funds will not go to waste if the investment laws are questioned before the court)?” he said in an interview on DWIZ.

“Ang pagbukas sa foreign direct investment, para magkaroon ng bigat, magkaroon ng tunay na ngipin, ang ginagawa nilang batas patungkol sa ekonomiya. Hanggang hindi natin inaamyendahan ang economic provision ng 1987 Constitution hindi magkakaroon ng liwanag, laging babagsak tayo sa SC, laging magkakaroon ng kababayang kokontra diyan sapagka’t karapatan ng bawat Pilipino ipaglaban kung ano ang sabi ng Constitution (If we want to give teeth to our laws allowing foreign direct investments, we need to amend the economic provisions of the 1987 Constitution. Otherwise, we ill al ays find ourselves efore the Supreme Court when groups question the constitutionality of our investment laws),” he added.

arlier, Padilla filed esolution of Both Houses No. that aims to amend the Constitution’s economic provisions through a constituent assembly. The resolution aims to amend economic provi- kokontra sa Constitution, walang mangyayari diyan kundi kokontrahin o maupupunta sa mercy ng Supreme Court (All laws will always be questioned before the Supreme Court if they are perceived to go investments. Even the executive department has agreed with my observation that we cannot have trade without investments),” he said.

Meanwhile, Padilla said he plans to have one or two public consultations before presenting the Committee Report before the plenary.

Rodriguez, further citing statements and position papers coming from the business sector during the public consultations, maintained that those amendents are not sufficient

“We should consider that the Constitution is the fundamental law of the land and all laws must conform to it and not the other way around. Meaning, not unless and until the constitutional restrictions are removed, the apprehensions and hesitancy on the part of the investors will consequently remain,” he said.

He pointed out that the 1987 Constitution contains numerous restrictions against the o of foreign capital in specific areas of econo ic activities espite the e orts of Congress to address the inimical economic situation of our country, the Philippines’ FDI (foreign direct investment) Regulatory restrictiveness ha pers the o of uch needed foreign investments,” he said. sions to encourage foreign direct investments.

“Although the restrictions on foreign ownership are designed to prioritize Filipino citizens, it is noted however, that the country sorely lacks the requisite capital to boost our economy and develop our natural resources. It is high time to liberalize such restrictions in order to encourage the free o of capital in the country and pave the way to global competitiveness,” he said.

He said the Philippine Constitution needs to be reviewed claiming it is the third most restrictive in the world and the most restrictive in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

Citing a graph from the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2020, Rodriguez said the Philippines is the most restrictive in terms of foreign equity capital which are enshrined in the Constitution.

Padilla noted that under the Constitution, any Filipino can question any law and challenge its constitutionality.

“Hanggang di natin nirerebisa o inaamyendahan ang ating Constitution patungkol sa economic provision, lagi po yan magkakaroon ng tanong katulad ng nangyari nitong huli - meron sana tayong joint exploration kasama ang China at Vietnam ano nangyari diyan, dinesisyunan ng SC na unconstitutional (Until we revise or amend our Constitution’s economic provisions, there will always be questions. For example, we could have had joint exploration with China and Vietnam but the Supreme Court deemed it unconstitutional),” he said.

“Lahat na batas na gagawin nyo na against the Constitution),” he added.

Also, Padilla said that while the Philippines continues to participate in international trade agreements, Filipinos cannot feel the e ects of such participation if there are no investments.

“Magkapatid talaga ang investment at trade. Hindi pupuwedeng puro trade walang investment. Isipin nyo sama tayo ng sama sa trade agreement. Basta trade agreement sumasama tayo diyan. Hindi naman bukas ang ating ekonomiya sa investment, one-way yan. At sumangayon naman ang executive sa sinasabi ko, na talagang hindi pwedeng puro trade walang investment, one-way yan (Investment and trade are like brethren. You cannot have trade without investments. We continue to join international trade agreements but our economy is restrictive to

He said adopting a more liberal policy will increase the country’s capital, increase fir productivity, increase government revenue, increase imports and exports, and increase the gross domestic product growth rate.

As for the rationale behind the calling of a constitutional convention, he said this mode of amending the Constitution would be “more transparent, more democratic, and less divisive.”

The constitutional convention will be composed of one delegate representing every legislative district in the country.

“It is important that constitutional reforms be completed through a transparent process that ensures the participation by the nation at large. In keeping with the sovereign mandate of the people, the new Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines should e truly re ective of the ideals and aspirations of the Filipino nation, and not just of a select few,” he said.