BY THE final year of the Duterte administration poverty incidence in the Philippines had risen to almost 24% of the population.
This means that more than 26 million Filipinos are not able to meet their daily basic needs – food or non-food. Subsistence incidence is at 9.9%. Around 11 million people do not have income to meet their most basic food requirements.
Poverty denies us access to education, even access to justice. The cycle goes on.
Will a new Constitution solve the problems of this country?
***
Senator Robinhood Padilla, the top draw in the recent senatorial elections, is the first non-lawyer to chair the Senate committee on constitutional amendments and revision of laws since the ratification of the Constitution in 1987.
So far, he has filed Senate Resolution no. 6 which directs his committee to study the country’s possible shift to a federal and parliamentary form of government.
This shift has historically been opposed by most Senators because it would also likely mean the abolition of the Senate.
The draft being bandied about pushes for a unicameral legislature. Is Sen. Padilla pushing for his own death warrant in politics?
***
Before we blame the current Constitution for the nation’s ills, we should ask ourselves – has its anti-poverty provisions been truly implemented?
For example, Article II, section 26 of the 1987 Constitution provides that “the State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”
Dynasties crush political competition. They erect barriers against those who may be better qualified to be in positions of leadership. They tend to propagate corruption and have become synonymous with abuse of power. Grinding poverty continues and causes more dynastism because it limits intellect-driven choices.
***
Someone born in 1987 is now raising sons and daughters. Yet the anti-dynasty provision has been buried in the graveyard of dead, non-self-executing, provisions of the Constitution.
Several generations of legislators have come and gone. But not one Congress has seen fit to pass a law defining and penalizing dynasties in implementation of a state policy clearly enunciated in our basic law.
In the meantime, political dynasties have mushroomed all over the place. It is painfully difficult to identify a single province where such a dynasty does not exist.
Politicians defeat term limits by having their wives, sons, daughters, brothers, and sisters, run in their place.
***
Sen. Padilla, as far as we know, is not currently part of a political dynasty. A newbie in the Senate, he is in the perfect position to push for the passage of the anti-dynasty law.
The committee Padilla heads is also a committee on “revision of laws.” He might want to resurrect the anti-dynasty bill filed by the late Miriam Defensor-Santiago.
Miriam’s bill sought to prohibit relatives within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity from running for public office at the same time, within the same province, city, or municipality, or from occupying at the same time national positions such as those in the House of Representatives and the Senate.
Is Padilla wasting his time tinkering with the Constitution? We think he better train his sights elsewhere if he is truly working for the poor among us./PN
