A FUTILE AND STUPID PROPOSITION

Have you heard of the standing petition with the Commission on Election of the Ang Kapatiran Party to provide it with the needed forms and/or procedures to eliminate political dynasty by amending the Constitution through the People's Initiative.  I don't exactly know, but based on what I see on television news, it seems to me Comelec Chair Sixto Brillantes is favoring that. By the way, I know I already wrote something on this issue last Nov. 1st;  Let this be Part 2 of that blog.

First off, let me lay down the related terms of reference.  1. Article II, Section 26, of the Constitution provides: The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibits political dynasties as may be defined by law. This simply means that for this charter provision to be feasible, Congress must pass an enabling law that principally defines "political dynasty."  Of course, after close to a quarter of a century, it has not, as indeed, our lawmakers will never do that; lest, they kill the goose that, for them, virtually lays the golden eggs.  2. On the other hand, under Article XVII, Sec. 2,  Amendments to this Constitution may likewise be directly proposed by the people through initiative upon a petition of at least twelve per centum of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters therein.  . . .The Congress shall provide for the implementation of the exercise of this right.  3.  Like in the political dynasty provision, an enabling law is also required to be passed by Congress in this connection.  That enabling law is supposed to be RA No. 6735, principally authored by former Sen. Raul Roco in August 1989 and appropriately titled "The People's Initiative and Referendum Act.".

As I understand, the Ang Kapatiran Party believes that by virtue of this enabling law they may now proceed to amend the Constitution, particularly the provision on political dynasty even though the latter has yet no enabling law of its own.  With all due respect, I think this undertaking is bound to be an exercise in futility.      
Why? For the following reasons:  First, RA No. 6735 has already been thrice rejected by the Supreme Court and declared as an insufficient enabling law for the purpose of Section 2, Article XVII of the Constitution.  Second, even granting the remote happenstance that the Supreme Court may now allow 6735 to operate for the purpose of the people's initiative system of amending the charter -- and that is after the horrendous process of securing people's signatures (this was exactly where the PIRMA failed) -- I refuse to believe there is a need to amend the Constitution, specifically Sect 2, Art. II, in order to eliminate dynasties in our political landscape.  For one thing, isn't it simply a matter of plain common sense that the only way to amend that provision is to allow, rather than prohibit political dynasties?    For another matter, the charter says political dynasty needs a law to define it, and only the Congress or our lawmakers, definitely not the people, who may do it.      

But having said the above, I certainly also strongly believe that the dominance of political dynasties in our midst and times has not only kept more deserving but poor individuals from running and winning in elections;  it has also enabled powerful and affluent individuals to corner appointive positions for their followers and relatives.  And so, we must really eliminate this political "curse!"  Despite the fact that our lawmakers will never do it, I still sincerely believe that the voice of the people is still democracy's most powerful tool.  I mean, I cannot agree more with the suggestion of Neal Cruz in a recent column: Let there be a People's Movement Against Political Dynasty. And let us join our act together by not voting every political "dynast" starting with next year's elections.  The process may indeed take some time, but I am sure if we will sustain and thus make what we mean loud and clear in every election, there surely is eventually going to be a light at the end of the tunnel.  We have vainly waited for twenty-five years for our (dis)honorable makers to do what they must, another twenty-five years will no longer be too long.