‘SC may no longer tackle con-ass’

The Supreme Court might not take up during its regular session today the petition of former senator John Osmeña seeking to stop the House of Representatives from convening as a constituent assembly, a court official said yesterday.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the SC official said Osmeña’s petition appeared to be "premature" as there is no controversy yet that needs the intervention of the court.

"The President herself called off (the constituent assembly)," the source said.

"There are incidents similar to this and usually the Court simply noted the petition. Unless there is further development, the High Court will not tackle it. The way it is drafted, it is very raw."

The official said there was no point for the Supreme Court to deliberate on Osmeña’s petition because Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. had given up on a constituent assembly to amend the Constitution.

"It was moot and academic since the con-ass was given up by House Speaker de Venecia," the source said.

In a 24-page petition for certiorari and prohibition filed through his lawyer Joselito John Blando last Friday, Osmeña said the SC must intervene and interpret the constitutional provision that provides for the Senate and House of Representatives to vote separately in convening as a constituent assembly.

"Clearly, what seems to be a mere change in the rules in the House of Representatives is actually a circumvention of the provisions on amendments or revisions, or Article XVII of the 1987 Constitution," Osmeña said.

"Speaker De Venecia, in numerous public news interviews, intimated on the move by the House of Representatives saying there will be a Charter that shifts the nation to the parliamentary system and replaces congress with a unicameral parliament by Dec. 15."

Osmeña said it was unconstitutional for the House to pass a resolution calling to convene itself as a constituent assembly.

"It goes against the essence of bicameralism espoused by the Constitution," he said.

Meanwhile, 18 law organizations under the umbrella of Alternative Law Groups (ALG) asked the House leadership yesterday to end the "senseless political adventurism of power-hungry legislators."

"The current move to change the Constitution is a desperate and overzealous attempt of the House majority members," ALG convenor lawyer Marlon Manuel said.

"The move to change the Constitution through their so-called constituent assembly is nothing but a tyranny of the House majority. This political adventurism aptly called the House Majority’s Ass is perhaps the most impertinent, if not the most putrid disregard of the rule of law, strangulating the Constitution, ostracizing the Senate and sacrificing people’s interest for the selfish aim of President Arroyo and her cohort of legislators to perpetually stay in power."

Manuel said the interpretation of President Arroyo and her allies at the House led by De Venecia that the House, without the Senate, could by itself convene as a constituent assembly to change the Constitution is erroneous.

"The Constitution clearly provides that amendments to or revision of the Charter may be proposed by Congress," he said.

"Since Congress is a bicameral body, composed of the Senate and the House of Representatives, then either one of the two houses of this bicameral body cannot do this task alone, without the consent of the other."

Manuel said the House majority "arrogantly and unconstitutionally" acted on its own "not only without the consent of the Senate but over the latter’s objection."

"The planned action of the House majority to mangle the Charter through a bogus con-ass is a continuation of the desecration of the Constitution that started with the Malacañang-backed fake people’s initiative," he said.

"It is a continuation of the disrespect that those belonging to the House majority have shown towards their colleagues in both chambers of Congress.

"It is in fact a continuing self-indictment exposing to the people the political greed of House majority members whose term will end in the next few months."

Manuel said even the participation of a few or some of the senators in the so-called con-ass will not pass the test of constitutionality because "individual senators cannot be considered as the Senate."