Angara questions basis of Comelec nixing of simultaneous 2025 polls, Cha-cha plebiscite

Senator Sonny Angara on Thursday questioned the legal basis of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) in ruling out the simultaneous conduct of the 2025 national and local elections (NLE) and the plebiscite to ratify the proposed amendments to the 1987 Constitution.

Angara, who leads the Senate subcommittee on constitutional amendments and revision of codes in deliberating Resolution of Both Houses No. 6, made the remark a day after Comelec chairperson Geroge Garcia invoked a previous Supreme Court ruling which supposedly prohibits the conduct of a regular election along with a national plebiscite.

"I'm not sure, 'di nga ako sure kung ano ang legal basis ni Chairman Garcia for saying that,” Angara, who proposed the idea, said during the Kapihan sa Senado.

(I'm not sure what Chairman Garcia's legal basis for saying that.)

Angara, who is a lawyer like Garcia, cited the 1981 SC decision on Occena vs. Comelec, which he said, ruled that the regular elections can be held along with the national plebiscite.

He likewise mentioned the position of Constitutional Commissioner Jose Suarez that the plebiscite can be held 60 to 90 days after Congress’ approval of the amendments to the constitution.

"’Yung legal deadline na 60 to 90 days, ‘yun ang dapat i-reconcile natin with the practical... requirement. Kaya ang proposal ko nga, at the latest by October, pero pwedeng mas maaga di ba?” Angara said.

(The legal deadline of 60 to 90 days should be reconciled with the practical requirement. That's why my proposal was to pass it before October or even earlier.)

“Kung magkaisa ang Senado, kung magkaisa tayong lahat, e ‘di why not?  Pero sabi ngayon, ang point ng mga senador, ang point ni Senate President Zubiri, and I totally agree with them is 'wag nating madaliin ito kasi mahalaga ito. ‘Yung Saligang Batas, hindi pangkaraniwang batas ‘yan na pwede nating bagu-baguhin…It must be stable, it must be well thought out...dahil pangmatagalan yan kumbaga,” he added.

(If the Senate will be united ... all of us, why not? But now, our point is, Senate President Zubiri's point is, and I totally agree with them ... is we don't rush this one because this is important. The Constitution is not an ordinary law which can be changed just like that. It must be well thought out.]

GMA News Online sought the comment of Garcia but he has yet to respond as of posting time.

'Practical deadline'

In pushing for this “practical deadline,” Angara said this is a better time for people to discuss whether or not they approve of the proposed amendments as this comes along with the discussion on who to vote for.

This could be a better opportunity for politicians who will run for 2025 elections to stand for or against charter change, he added.

While he considered the passage of RBH 6 before October, Angara said there is no assurance from the Senate that the measure will be approved by that time as this is still a collegial decision.

“No, it’s not an assurance because how can I speak for 23 senators, di ba?  I can only speak for Senator Angara. Maybe, Senate President [Juan Miguel] Zubiri and Senate President Pro Tempore [Loren] Legarda because we filed the resolution, paninindigan namin ‘yun resolusyon namin, di ba?” Angara said.

(We will stand by our resolution.)

“But we cannot assure na ‘di siya ma-amyendahan ng aming mga kasamahan…Hindi madali ang kumuha ng 18 votes sa isang panukala especially for a question as difficult, as challenging as economic Cha-cha. Hindi madali yan,” he added.

(We cannot assure that the measure will not be amended by our colleagues. It is not easy to get 18 votes for a measure that is as difficult and challenging as the economic Cha-cha.)

Now is also not the time to do a head count among senators because there is no clarity yet on RBH 6, he went on.

Angara also responded to the pressure from the House of Representatives for the Senate to pass RBH 6 by March, saying it was the members of the lower chamber who did not honor the first agreement to stop the ongoing people’s initiative, which is believed to be supported by the congressmen.

“Pinangako rin ng House na ititigil ‘yung PI di ba? Eh alam naman natin kung anong nangyari di ba? Rumatsada pa lalo. So parang kumbaga, ‘yung usapan na ‘yon, wala na ‘yon, di ba? ‘Yun ang unang usapan na walang tumupad,” Angara said.

“So parang tanga naman ‘yung Senado na tutupad sila sa usapan tapos kayo hindi kayo tumutapad. Kaliwaan to, di ba? Tumupad kayo, tutupad kami. Ngayon sinisingil kami. Ba’t di kayo tumupad?  Ikaw naman oh parang niloloko mo naman ako,” Angara went on.

(The House promised that they will stop the PI, right? But what happened? It was even fast-tracked. So it seems like the agreement to pass RBH 6 in a certain month is no longer there. That is the first agreement that was not honored. It will be foolish for the Senate to honor that when the other parties are not following the agreement. Now, they are asking us to follow it? Why didn't they honor it before?)

Angara also took a swipe at the daily press conferences held by the members of the House of Representatives, saying he is considering this as a form of “bullying.”

“Pag inaatake kami, hindi naman pwedeng hindi kami sumagot, di ba? Pag binu-bully ka hindi ka sasagot? Hindi naman pwede ‘yon. Ako ang author ng Anti-Bullying Act sa House kaya hindi kami papayag,” Angara said.

(If we are being attacked, isn't it just right to fight back? Are you going to stay silent if you are being bullied already? That's not right. I'm the author of the Anti-Bullying Act in the House of Representatives. That's why we will not let this pass.)

“Parang ganon na ang lumalabas. Biro mo, araw-araw? Di ba parang bully ‘yon? Di ba parang inaaraw-araw kami. Guys, mag-break naman. Time out, time out. Magtrabaho naman tayo,” he went on.

(It appears that they are bullying us with the daily press conferences that they are holding. Isn't that bullying? Guys, let's take a break. Let's do our jobs.)

Lawmakers from the Senate and the House of Representatives have been trading barbs over the issue of charter change, which started when a signature campaign was launched asking the people if they are in favor of Congress voting jointly on proposed amendments to the 1987 Constitution.

Senators believed that this people’s initiative was supported by congressmen, including Speaker Martin Romualdez.

Romualdez has repeatedly denied that he was involved in this people's initiative and explained that the House of Representatives only facilitates this democratic process. — RSJ, GMA Integrated News