Cha-Cha: A Trojan horse

In ancient times the Greeks waged a ten year war against the city of Troy but were unable to breach its walls. The Greeks then built a wooden horse, hid its soldiers in the horse and offered it to the city as a tribute to the goddess Athena. Once inside the Greek soldiers emerged in the stealth of night and took over the city. The Trojan horse has since become a metaphor for anything that is offered as a gift or solution but hides an evil intent.

The Cha-Cha being proposed by the House leadership to amend our Constitution is a Trojan Horse. It is promoted as a means to attract foreign investment but is suspected to have a darker purpose mainly to extend term limits or permanently entrench the powers at be via a shift say to a Parliamentary system.

As I understand our Constitution can be revised in three different ways either through a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con) which framed our 1987 Constitution; via a Constituent Assembly where two thirds of the House and the Senate gathering as one can make amendments; or via a People’s Plebiscite where at least 12% of registered voters including 3% of each of the 257 voting districts sign up for specific changes.

A Con-Con is complicated, takes time and cannot be railroaded by our current legislators so that is out.

A Constituent Assembly is possible but there is legal disagreement whether the 315 Congressmen and 24 Senators vote as one or each chamber votes separately. In the former the Senators will be vastly outnumbered. The Congressmen say there is little danger of unwanted changes because the agenda will be very specific i.e. will only be limited to “economic provisions”. However in a plenary session the agenda can be amended to include new provisions such as a shift to a parliamentary system.

In a parliamentary system the head of Government (the Prime Minister) is elected not directly by the people but by the Members of Parliament (MPs) who in turn are elected by their local districts. This contrasts with our Presidential system where the President is elected directly by the people. In a Parliamentary system a Prime Minister can remain in office for a very long time as long as he has the confidence of the MPs. Effectively the Chief Executive would be what today is the Speaker of the House which explains why the present House Leadership is so enthusiastic about charter change.

Given the obstacles of both a Con-Con and a Constituent Assembly the proponents of Cha-Cha have adopted the fall back of a People’s Plebiscite since, given enough money, it should be easy enough to generate some 6 million required signatures to force both legislative chambers to consider charter changes. Already it is said DWSD, DOLE funds and other Government pockets are being used to finance the signature campaign; which is illegal. Again in most cases the signatories are not officially told what they are signing up for as required by law. During GMA’s term, the Supreme Court rejected the Sigaw Ng Bayan plebiscite as defective for failing to do just this. The COMELEC is supposedly to verify the process but we know that is not a safeguard.

The economic changes being contemplated by Cha-Cha refer to the easing of ownership restrictions for advertising businesses, educational institutions and public utilities. These comprise few jobs and less than 1/10th of one percent of GDP so they are hardly essential to the development of our economy. They do not justify the expense, energy and dangers in revising the Constitution. A number of bills to substantially ease foreign ownership have already been passed so why are the so called “economic” changes now needed not included then? Again why not simply add the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” to the Constitutional restrictions on foreign ownership? The timing of Cha-Cha just 14 months before the 2025 mid-terms suggests Cha-Cha is being unpacked not for economic but for political reasons.

We do not need the changes in economic provisions being contemplated to promote foreign investments. The PSA (which incorporated some significant foreign investment concessions) was passed, corporate income taxes were slashed and the President has spent billions in foreign trips to attract foreign capital; but foreign direct investments (FDIs) have been dropping for the last 1 1/2 years. What we need is good governance, consistent and fair policies, political stability, an educated and disciplined workforce, infrastructure, ease and cost of doing business and a Government that does what it says. If we cannot even pay exporters the VAT refunds that are due them how can we expect foreign investors to relocate to our country?

To add to our troubles, we are now faced with potential geo-political conflict. The growing U.S. military presence in our land and the build up in fuel reserves in Subic exposed by Sen. Imee; may be necessary to boost our defenses but they it also make us a military target by China much as Taiwan. Stocks of Taiwanese companies trade at a discount to their foreign peers because of their geo-political risk. Foreign investors would prefer to locate their supply chains in other less militarily vulnerable countries like Thailand and Indonesia.

Senate President Zubiri with the support of the President believes he can contain the dangers of charter change by limiting the amendments to three economic provisions but that will not happen. Once there is a constituent assembly House members could and probably will in a plenary revise the agenda to introduce say a Parliamentary system or term extensions; and pass such revisions by requiring that the voting be done as one body (where 24 Senate votes will be overwhelmed by 315 House votes) rather than the Senate and House voting separately. The procedure is unclear in the current Constitution in which case the matter will be elevated to the Supreme Court where things can be more easily managed (witness the Okada case). This explains why the House is now amenable to the Senate suggestion to limit the charter changes; knowing that once there is an opening and the Constituent Assembly is formed the system can be manipulated to go beyond the original intent.

The Senate should not entertain any suggestions for Constitutional change however limited in scope. The economic advantages of loosening the ownership in advertising, education and public utilities are insignificant compared to the potential threats to our democracy and way of life once the door is opened. Cha=Cha is a Trojan horse that hides a nefarious intent. Our democratic institutions in the executive, the legislative and the judiciary are too weak to withstand a determined, fully funded, cunning and well devised stranglehold on our freedoms.

This is not the first time that an administration is proposing constitutional changes. Yet Filipinos have consistently opposed and should oppose such proposals. The 2025 mid-terms will be a test. Politicians who back such an initiative run the risk of being rejected. Our countrymen can smell a rat even before they see one and this one, I am afraid, smells just that.