Solons question anti-turncoatism, anti-dynasty Cha-cha proposals

House of Representatives lawmakers on Tuesday questioned the anti-turncoatism and anti-political dynasties provisions proposed by the Department of the Interior and Local Government's (DILG's) inter-agency body on constitutional reforms.

During the House Committee on Constitutional Amendments' deliberations on the proposed constitutional amendments by the DILG Inter-agency Task Force on Federalism and Constitutional Reforms, representatives expressed their dislike for a provision that disallowed members of any political party elected to public office from changing their political parties within their term of office.

They were also irked by a prohibition on candidates and officials of any political party from changing political parties one year after the election and one year before the next election.

Surigao Del Sur Representative Johnny Pimentel pointed out that the two parts of the same provision contradicted each other.

"This proposal was hastily done. It's very clear, A and B are two conflicting provisions!" claimed Pimentel

Isabela Representative Tonypet Albano, for his part, said the second part of the provision should be reworded to emphasize that losing and non-elected officials of any political party are the ones who are actually prohibited from changing political parties.

Pimentel also argued that if the House really wanted to prohibit turncoatism, the second part of the provision needed to be deleted.

"This is anti-turncoatism, but after one year I can change party, ganun din. I just wait it out for one year then I would change," he said.

"That would mean during your three-year term of office, hindi ka talaga pwedeng lumipat," he added.

Meanwhile, House panel chair Rufus Rodriguez argued that all Filipinos had the constitutional right to freedom of association.

"That is why there is always a window. That's why they have placed here a freedom period," Rodriguez said.

"If you prohibit them in the entire three years, that is not democratic and a violation of the freedom of association," he added.

Political dynasties

Representatives went on to pillory a proposal to prohibit political dynasties.

According to their proposal, "no person related to an incumbent elective official as a spouse, and within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity... can run for the same position in the immediately following election."

Pimentel suggested to defer this provision citing the need for thorough study, and because it supposedly curtailed the right of the people to vote.

"Kung gusto nila, kung maganda naman yung trabaho nung incumbent, it is the right of the people to put in place who will be their congressman, their governor. So this is one way of curtailing of the right to vote of the citizens," he said.

For his part, Albano said the provision was "anti-democratic" because it limits the right of a person to run and be elected to a public post.

"It is democracy at risk here, and with the onset of Facebook and all these media, the strengthening of political reforms and educating people is more important than limiting the democratic right of a person to run and be voted upon whether he is a spouse, a son, a brother or sister," he said.

The committee decided to hold another meeting next week to allow the members of the DILG inter-agency body to brief all lawmakers regarding their proposed amendments to the Constitution.

It also resolved to hold in abeyance the committee report on Charter change that it approved in a closed-door meeting last year to consider the proposals of the inter-agency body. — DVM, GMA News