Davide: 1987 Constitution best for PHL; shift to federalism a ‘plunge to death’

Former Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. on Wednesday reiterated that there is “absolutely no need” to amend the 1987 Constitution, saying “it is the best in the world” although perhaps imperfect.

Davide, along with other former members of the judiciary, was in attendance during the joint hearing of the Senate committees on constitutional amendments and revision of codes, and electoral reforms and people’s participation on Charter change (Cha-cha) proposals.

“There is absolutely no need to amend or revise the Constitution,” Davide said in his opening statement, taking note that the Charter has remain unamended for the last 31 years despite prior attempts during the administrations of former presidents Fidel Ramos and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

The 1987 Constitution, Davide said, “is the best for our country and for our people not just of this generation, but even for generations yet unborn.”

“It is the only Constitution I know which is pro-God, pro-Filipino, pro-people, pro-poor, pro-life, pro-family, pro-marriage, pro-human rights, pro-women, pro-environment, among others,” he said.

“It constitutes sufficient provisions against abuse of power and guarantees people’s active participation of governance, including use of people power,” Davide, a member of the 1986 Constitutional Commission, added.

Davide said, however, that if Cha-cha will push through, it should be held through a constitutional convention (con-con) wherein delegates are non-partisan.

Congress leaders have said that Cha-cha will be a priority this year as the Duterte administration pushes for the shift to a federal form of government.

Plunge to death

Davide warned that the shift to federalism would be a “lethal experiment.”

“A shift to federalism is a lethal experiment, a fatal leap, a plunge to death and a leap to hell,” he said.

Former Senate President Aquilino “Nene” Pimentel Jr., founder of ruling party PDP-Laban, rejected Davide’s statement, saying federalism “is not a lethal proposal” but rather a “vital proposal.”

Pimentel said, however, that there is “no need to revise the good provisions of the Constitution” and that the amendments should be done via con-con despite the mode being a more expensive one.

Pimentel is also of the position that if Congress pushes through with a constituent assembly (con-ass), sessions should be held jointly by the Senate and the House of Representatives, but voting should be done separately.

In a con-ass, members of Congress are convened to amend the Constitution. In a con-con, the people who will amend the Charter are elected by the people.

On Tuesday night, the House of Representatives adopted the resolution seeking to convene Congress into a con-ass to propose amendments in the Constitution.

Several senators have previously said that they will oppose joint voting on Cha-cha. —ALG, GMA News