No more “requesting” or “urging” resolutions please

This article that I have written for today is most discomforting to me. It took me days to decide whether or not to write it. I am certain that some distinguished people will have their pride and perhaps, honor, pricked by this write-up and in consequence the probability that they will waste whatever amiable relationships we have had in the past is high. But, I have to do this, not to embarrass anybody but out of my duty to help our people look deeper into the role and responsibility of certain elected officials.

 Every now and then, we read reports of resolutions proposed by the distinguished members of the Sanggunian Panlungsod. At the bottom of these documents, the word Honorable is always prefixed to the names of the authors, in order, perhaps, to highlight their hallowed echelon in our social structure. These measures that I am talking about carry the title “A RESOLUTION REQUESTING (certain government agencies) to adopt the program ...” and/or “A RESOLUTION STRONGLY URGING (certain offices or even the private sector) to do this or that...” For purposes of brevity and for lack of a more appropriate nomenclature, I call these proposals either as “requesting resolution” or “urging resolution”.

Let us understand that a resolution is defined as an expression of a sentiment or an opinion or view of a member of a legislative body like the city council or of the assembly itself. A resolution is not a law in the context that it does not have any binding force or compulsive provision. It is fleeting and non-permanence is its nature and we shall take that definition and nature in relation to these “requesting or urging resolutions”.

For purposes of this discussion, I like to corrupt and take up a proposed resolution filed by a city councilor “urging the Department of Education” to create a program following COVID-19-generated responses like wearing face masks, shields, frequent handwashing and social distancing for pupils in the elementary grades. At first glance, the measure looked like a heavy piece of legislation. Health protocols, of the kind that peoples throughout the world have begun to embrace, seem to be the focus of the author of the proposed “urging” resolution. It can be immediately observed that the legislative proponent appeared to be like someone who knew better than the DepEd officialdom. What health practices the education officials might have failed to comprehend or did not know, the councilor was more knowledgeable. That was why the all-too-knowing councilor urged the incompetent DepEd officials to do, or so it seemed.

In fact, an “urging (or requesting) resolution” is, for all legislative intent, useless. Suppose, the DepEd, in the example given above, had its own guidelines and mechanisms not different in concept to known health protocols, but are couched in dissimilar language, is the “urging or requesting” done by the sanggunian member not an unnecessary opinion? On the other hand, what if the DepEd ignores the councilor’s “urging” or “request”, can the act of the education officials concerned be deemed a contempt of the local legislator? And what about the expenses of putting this useless resolution to print and the time used in discussing, are they compensated?

If permanence and obedience were the factors in mind of the author, he should have written an ordinance. Let our councilors not pass the job of crafting rules and regulations to other parties (which is the objective of urging or requesting resolutions). Meaningful, purposeful, pro-active, substantively useful, and visionary ordinances are what SP members need to work on. After all, we pay them huge salaries.