N.B. – Below are my short answers to a questions sent by a University of the Philippines (UP) student who is writing an article on charter change.

What is your take on proposals to change the 1987 Constitution?

Charter change is not just a shameless act to promote the legislators self-interest of staying in power but also a despicable act of selling the country’s sovereignty to the highest bidder. Through the years, pro-globalization legislators have tried to change the Constitution to allow foreigners to own land, as well as provide them the right to own mass media organizations which is currently exclusive to Filipinos. Freedom-loving Filipinos should oppose such moves and expose the legislators for who they really are.

What is your opinion in Nograles’ “fourth mode” in amending the Constitution? In this approach, the bill would be treated as an ordinary legislation in which the House and the Senate vote separately on its merits. A three-fourths vote of each chamber is needed to pass the bill.

The so-called fourth mode is definitely a way to move around the explicit provisions in the constitution. It’s not just patently illegal but also shameless to think that changes in the highest law of the land would be treated as ordinary legislation. The strategy is meant to undermine debates between members of the Senate and the House of Representatives, given that wide opposition is seen in the Senate as regards charter change.

What are the chances of charter change being approved under this approach?

The Philippines is not just a country of sorrows but also a land of miracles. Unless the people remain vigilant, the pro-charter change proponents will get what they want. This is not the first time, after all, that laws are interpreted to favor the interests of the powers-that-be.

You’ve said that the charter change is an act to “promote the legislators’ self-interest of staying in power,” what could be its effects and consequences in the 2010 elections?

The agenda behind charter change is mainly economic but the political dimension there is also the lifting of term limits. The President badly needs this to avoid litigation proceedings once she steps down in 2010 and becomes a private citizen who is not anymore immune from suit. She is well aware that cause-oriented groups are just waiting for this to file charges against her in court for various incidences of corruption and extra-judicial killings, among many other crimes against the people. The long and short of it is simple: The President benefits greatly if she stays in power beyond 2010, and the holding of presidential elections by that time could get in the way of that. The other acceptable scenario, of course, is if the administration bet gets elected President.