Metro Manila mayors: Wrong time for Cha-cha

MANILA, Philippines — Several mayors of Metro Manila believe this is not the time for amending the Constitution.

Mayors Joy Belmonte of Quezon City and Toby Tiangco of Navotas said yesterday that the timing is off for Congress to pursue Charter change (Cha-cha) amid the pandemic.

“Pakiusap naman, huwag muna ngayon (Not now, please),” Tiangco, a former congressman, urged his former colleagues in the House of Representatives through the virtual Kapihan sa Manila Bay forum.

Likewise, Belmonte said she is wary over the timing of the move for Cha-cha.

“I see the sense in economic Charter change, especially during these times that we need to recover economically, but within certain bounds and limits,” she told the Kapihan.

She said she supports certain economic amendments to the Constitution which her father, former House speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr., espoused in order to improve the business climate in the country.

These included lifting restrictions on foreign ownership of public utilities, land and media.

But the elder Belmonte did not have his economic Cha-cha approved in 2015 due to lack of votes. Tiangco was among those who opposed it in the 16th Congress.

The Navotas mayor said at this time he would rather help his constituents recover their losses due to the pandemic.

“The benefits (of legislated economic reforms) will not be (felt) that fast, so maybe we can talk about that at another time. Maybe not this time,” he insisted.

For her part, Belmonte said there should be a middle ground that will encourage innovation and investments, while also not selling the country off to foreigners.

“A lot of the (restrictive economic) provisions should be removed and looked into. That’s not something that’s wrong, we have to be flexible with the changing times,” she said.

The Quezon City mayor said she understands public hesitation to Cha-cha, especially now that an administration’s term is nearing its end. “There are issues of suspicions and timing and these things have to be taken into consideration,” she said.

But retired Supreme Court justice Adolf Azcuna, who was among the framers of the 1987 Constitution, supports the proposed economic amendments, saying this is precisely the time to do it.

“It is high time for us to look at and review these restrictive economic positions, especially during the time of pandemic, when there is a need for our economy to recover from the negative impact of the pandemic,” he said.

Now a chancellor of the Philippine Judicial Academy, Azcuna said: “Economic policy should be flexible; it should not be written in stone.”

“When we did write it in stone in the Constitution, I felt personally that we did not mean it to last for 34 years. And in fact, we provided that after five years the Constitution may be amended, even by initiative, by the people themselves,” he added.

Their comments were aired as the House committee on constitutional amendments headed by Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin Jr. voted 62-3 Tuesday adopting Resolution of Both Houses 2 which gives Congress the flexibility to amend the provisions.

Yesterday, the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) lauded the passage of the resolution authored by Speaker Lord Allan Velasco.

“The passage of the resolution is one giant step towards achieving our goal of improving the investment climate of the country which has been curtailed for the past 34 years by the outdated economic provisions of the Constitution and devastated by the global pandemic,” said Undersecretary Jonathan Malaya, DILG spokesman.

Having been passed in the House committee on constitutional reforms, the proposed measure will now go to the plenary for debate.

Malaya pledged the DILG’s help in explaining the benefits of lifting economic restrictions in the 1987 Constitution, such as attracting more foreign investors and leading to more job opportunities.

The House committee on ways and means claimed that the passage of the economic amendments will create some 6.6 million jobs in 10 years as well as pour in P330 billion in annual foreign direct investments.

Among the revisions proposed by the RBH2 is the addition of the phrase “unless otherwise provided by law” to constitutional provisions on several industries.

Malaya said the proposal will not allow foreigners to own private land but open more industries to foreign investments.

“The DILG fully supports the decision of the committee to prohibit foreigners from owning private land in the country. Foreign investors can always do long-term leases for their factories and houses, so this will have no impact on the quality of foreign investment,” he said.