House efforts to amend charter sans Senate will be rejected by public

Senator Sherwin Gatchalian made this remark asking House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez to put an end to their efforts to amend the Constitution without the Senate reminding him that a bicameral legislature is needed to change the fundamental law. (Photo: Sherwin Gatchalian/Facebook)

MANILA — The efforts of the House of Representatives (HOR) to amend the 1987 Constitution without the participation of the Senate will result in an “illegitimate” draft constitution which will be rejected by the people via plebiscite, a senator said Wednesday.

Senator Sherwin Gatchalian made this remark asking House Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez to put an end to their efforts to amend the Constitution without the Senate reminding him that a bicameral legislature is needed to change the fundamental law.

“House Speaker Alvarez must put an end to the House’s efforts to amend the 1987 Constitution without the participation of the Senate,” Gatchalian said in a statement.

Gatchalian pointed out that the House cannot amend the Constitution without the Senate’s consent, and vice versa.

“It would be absurd for one chamber of a bicameral legislature to be able to change the fundamental law of the land without the participation and assent of the other chamber,” he added.

He further said that the leadership of the House should work with the Senate leadership to create an “inclusive and constitutionally sound” plan to convene the chambers together in a constituent assembly (con-ass) instead of attempting to “undermine and bypass the Senate.”

Moreover, he said that constitutional law experts were in agreement that the proposal of amendments or revisions to the 1987 Constitution requires both chambers of Congress to convene in a con-ass.

Last week, two former Supreme Court (SC) chief justices said that if the Congress should convene in a con-ass to amend the 1987 Constitution, voting should be done separately and not jointly.

Among them was former SC chief justice Reynato Puno who said that he believed that the Congress should vote separately as voting

jointly meant the cancellation of the participation of the Senate.

“When a bicameral Congress convenes as a con-ass, the intent, the tradition and the practice, is to make the two houses vote as separate and independent institutions,” Puno said.

Puno also said that the two houses had different constituencies – members of the House represent districts while members of Senate represent the nation.

“As institutions, they are equal. They have different perspectives and these perspectives have to be reflected institutionally,” he added.