Cha-cha’s real aim, an impeachment-proof
Arroyo presidency — ALG

GMA’ss Constitutional Coup

GMA’s central agenda since the “let’s start the great debate” SONA, changing the present charter with her “ultimate solution” constitution will accomplish two objectives: escape from accountability and entrench her and her allies in power. GMA allies will dominate a unicameral Parliament that has the sole power to impeach her. With some of the limitations on her powers today removed, the power to dissolve the Parliament and a “Supreme Court stripped of the power to determine whether she has gravely abused her discretion”, GMA will have the vast powers exercised by President Marcos.

Crucially, GMA’s constitutional coup would effectively undercut any legal and constitutional challenge to her legitimacy and let her stay in power, constitutionally more secure, from the transitory period to 2010 and beyond. Without true mandate, GMA bribes, entices, corrupts and cons to remain in power. Each day that she stays in Malacanang, our patrimony is being plundered, our treasury pillaged, our institutions damaged, our future pawned, our land served as collateral until our sovereignty is virtually surrendered.

lokalokang matino said:
“CHA-CHA is no way to solve the country’s problems, although it will solve Mrs Jose Pidals problem.”

IMHO, mas malaki nga ang posibilidad na maresolba ang mga problema sa bansa sa pamamagitan ng CHACHA.

sa pagkakaalam ko, there’s greater accountability of public officials in a parliamentary form of government than in a presidential system. dahil may direktang partisipasyon ang prime minister sa lehislatura, sya ay walang excuse na hindi sya nasasangkot sa posibleng kapalpakan sa pagsasabatas ng mga bagong polisiya.

madali rin nasisibak sa trabaho ang mga opisyales ng gobyerno lalung lalo na ang mga miyembro ng paliament sa pamamagitan ng vote of no confidence.

mas mabilis pang di hamak ito kesa sa kasalukuyang sistema dahil matatanggal na dekadekadang mabagal na proseso. trabahong ginagawa noon ng dalwang chamber, pwede namang gawin ng isang chamber. ilang linggo lang maisasabatas na ang mga bill. di tulad sa sistema ngayon na umaabot ng tatlong taon bago masabatas. kung sa mas maikling panahon natatapos ang mga importanteng trabaho at mas marami ang nagagawa, mas uunlad ang bansa.

mas hahangaan tayo ng ibang bansa kung magiging mas produktibo ang mga kawani ng gobyerno at may political stability tayo. mas marami ding maeengganyong mga foreign investors kung maiimplement ang paglilift ng mga economic restrictions. milyun milyong pinoy ang magkakaroon ng trabaho.

In a mature democracy, the Parliamentary form of government will work. The environment should be where the MPs are not easily swayed by money.

The parliamentary form of government can surely make new laws faster, but can it implement it properly too? The downside to being fast is that when the government leaders mean well only to themselves not to the general public. They can be fast too in passing legislations and implementing them even if it’s not for the people’s benefit.

I would like to support those changes, but not in Gloria Arroyo’s time. I have no trust in her. (Remember the Rizal day promise? Remember the I’m sorry for lapse of judgment comedy?)

Those who are going to change the constitution should not directly benefit from it (in terms of money, business, or position in government). The same principle as when the current congressmen and senators cannot increase their own salaries.

Also in Parliamentary form, there is a time alloted during the session period where the governing party (the Prime Minister and his cabinet)and the opposition party or parties face each others in a Question Period where the opposition could raise all issues in a question and answer format. This is the part where they sometimes resort to wrestling and name calling all for the sake of “debating” the proposed bills and any other trivias. Believe me it’s fun to watch.

What about the one now? Does it work? Or is it Ms Arroyo? Or Was It Pres Estrada? Or Pres. Aquino? or Pres Ramos? Nobody ever think that parliamentary system is the solve all solutions or the magic wand, far from it, what some of us here are suggesting is to take a look at the charter on its own merit without factoring the current administration, then decide. As far as I know the country is still a democracy, otherwise we won’t be arguing here. On my side it is not a problem. thank you..

In a phone interview with UNTV, James Marty Lim (Pres., League of Barangays) who’s a staunch supporter of Cha-Cha said that he is very disappointed by the way these assemblies were conducted. He even said that the release of funds for the barangays were suspect because of the timing. He added that he’s very sure that 90% of those who signed does not understand what they were signing for. He also confirmed reports of monetary rewards for most signatures reported. He said that this “process” is improper and tantamount to bribery.

Coming from an ally of GMA, I guess this is a “rude awakening” for him. For someone full of idealism, I think he would now re-think his support for the administration.

cvj said,
March 28, 2006 @ 11:41 pm

naykika, it’s a ‘democracy’ here because the weblog owner does not censor your comments. in the outside world, you have EO464, CPR, PP1017, raids on newspapers, killings of journalists…
———————————————————–
the EO464 is a presidential prerogative. it is a part of democracy, and the reason why was executed is the same as what we have here as a “privy council”. That all close officials to the the prime minister and his cabinet are sworn to secrecy and that whatever taken in privy will remain secret. The only difference ours talk about government business. The CPR is one way to maintain public order. If you are aware lately, some protesters against the seal hunt were arrested and charged because they violated the terms of the permit of their protest.
no matter how huge and important the protests, they are always required by the Police to have permit and conditions for holding them. otherwise the organizers will be charged for illegal assembly. If newspapers that got raided felt that they were wronged, I still believe that they have recourse under the law for recovery for the injuries and damages. As for killings of journalists it is criminal act. We never had any and I’m just wondering why.

democracy phil style. ba’t kaya di rin mag-issue si bush ng ala eo464 para matigil na yang mga damaging congressional inquiries na yan or di kaya si chirac ay magpalabas din ng CPR para matigil na yang mga kaguluhan sa kanilang mga kalsada.

EO464, CPR, PP1017, Are all intended to save Mrs. Jose Pidal. These
orders are undemocratic, WHY? because these prevent people to move and speak freely.

In the US even, the Secret Service are not exempted from Subpoena, The US Supreme Court said so.

I just hope the Philippine Supreme Court finally settlle these issues the soonest possible.

CHA-CHA now? No!!! ONLY After gloria is brought to justice.

The CHA-CHA will only earn credibility if there is a provision that says:

1. ” ALL INCUMBENT PUBLIC OFFICIALS FROM THE PRESIDENT DOWN TO THE BARANGAY LEVEL WILL NOT BENEFIT FROM THIS CHA-CHA”

2. “THE NEW CHARTER SHALL TAKE EFFECT ONLY AFTER THE LAST REMAINING ELECTED OFFICIAL HAS SERVED HIS/HER
ALLOWABLE TERM LIMITS UNDER THE PREVIOUS CHARTER HAS BEEN EXHAUSTED.”

I challenge gloria and de venecia to include these very important safeguard provision. Let see how honest they are.

Changing the government set up to benefit oneself is highly irregular,and immoral. It is CORRUPTION in the highest Order.

Crucial to the percentage of approval to impeachment in the parliamentary system, is the two thirds majority vote. (Till now we don’t it is not clear what model of parliamentary systerm is being proposed) In a bicameral, presidential government, two thirds are needed for both houses. In the parliamentary system it is not very easy to gather two thirds since the votation in all practical purposes goes with party lines. Therefore it is obvious that GMA impeachment would be very difficult in the parliamentary systerm being proposed.

I agree very much with the respected constitionalist, Fr. Joachin Bernas, who presents and a constitutional impediment to this much publishized people’s initiative. Has this initiative a backing of an enabling law promulgated by the constitution? No.

Another: People’s initiative is only constitutional if it is for the ammendment, not revision of the constitution. To have a cha-cha from the presidential to parliamentary system of government is certainly a revision. To have cha-cha on the basis of people’s initiative is not constitutional.

Lastly, was the manner of collecting signatures enlightened? Was it done with transparency or a certain degree of trickery.

We need to ask for more information about the Tabuena Commission and study it. I hope that this website could supply its readers.