Against the cadence of Cha-cha

After decades of resisting the threats of constitutional reform, which feeds the Filipinos with overall-simplistic formulas presented as the solution to the country’s socio-economic challenges, the likelihood to pass the Charter Change, or colloquially known to be Cha-Cha, is more striking in the current administration.

“We have to change the Constitution, whether federal or whatnot,” thus asserted by the country’s current head of the state, President Rodrigo Duterte, in his speech at the oathtaking ceremony of new government appointees. He is not the only one who thinks this way, who believes in the need for Cha-Cha. Without even being backed by any comprehensive explanation as to how this could solve the perennial problems of the Philippines, it can be seen that there is a tireless assertion to the said reform, which would definitely change the stream of affairs in the country for better or for worse.

As the current administration got hold of the steer, Cha-Cha seems to be packing itself under the sheath of the Federalism campaign that seems to promote the idealistic promises of decentralization in the archipelagic republic of the country. In a discourse that is spearheaded by the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG), there will be autonomy to political and economic jurisdiction in each administrative or autonomous region with an ideal notion of rural development.

In the Philippines, changing the constitution is initiated through a proposal stage, wherein changes are proposed by a Constitutional Assembly (Con-Ass) or a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con), or through People’s Initiative — as described by the 1987 Philippine Constitution. Three-fourths of Congress can make a Con-Ass. Elected delegates from Congress can make a Con-Con. A People’s Initiative, on the other hand, is processed through a petition of at least 12% of the number of registered voters under the Republic Act 6735 or the Initiative and Referendum Act.

It can be noted in the recent midterm elections that administration-backed candidates dominated the seats in Congress. Noting that Cha-Cha can be sorted out through the Con-Con, which can be derived from the joint forces of the recently-elected senators and the incumbent senators, the said reform will be much closer to implementation, especially now that the agendas of the branches of government no longer resemble independence to each other and seem to just be maneuvered by a single person.

Behind the promises of decentralization, there are hounding disputes such as the removal of term limits, the impending increase of foreign participation in the country’s economy, and the implementation of neoliberal amendments to the Philippine Constitution — all of which are strongly opposed by progressive groups and organizations.

In addition, concerning the ‘decentralization’ that is being sold to the Filipino people under Cha-Cha, it can be noted that decentralization can manifest through the strengthening of the Local Government Code of 1991, which aims to provide a more responsive local government structure instituted through a system of decentralization whereby Local Governments are delegated more powers, authority, responsibilities, and resources.

According to Sonny Africa, the Executive Director of the IBON Foundation, Cha-Cha will not be the harbinger of a reform to the country’s economy but “the obsolete obsession with free-market dogma and foreign investment.” Moreover, one of the directors also of the IBON Foundation named Rosario Bella Guzman, said that the material conditions for this national ‘development’ are already present in the Philippines, such as natural resources, people, and level of technology. Both Africa’s and Guzman’s statements pinned down to the ‘questionable’ proposal that further conceptualizes the necessity of the proposed constitutional reform.

On contrary to this, Former Bayan Muna Representative Neri Colmenares, Rochelle Poras of Ecumenical Institute for Labor Education and Research, and former Agrarian Reform Secretary Rafael Mariano, enumerated the problematic provisions of the impending ­Cha-Cha, which can be seen in the Resolution of Both Houses №8, PDP-Laban draft, and House Concurrent Resolution №9, specifically: (1) allowing foreign corporations to dominate the economy; (2) public utilities no longer reserved for Filipino citizens and corporations; (3) deregulation of employment and industrial policies; and (4) the compromise the struggle of genuine land reform for decades.

With Cha-Cha being in between the siege of disagreements due to its proposed revisions in the constitution, as seen in the 2018 survey of Pulse Asia Research, 64% of the Filipino respondents are still not in favor of the amendment of the Philippine Constitution, while 75% of the respondents stated that they had “little or no knowledge at all” of the 1987 Philippine Constitution itself.

The efforts of the administration maneuvering towards an authoritarian rule might be growing hefty but the numbers of handwringing and the volume of clamors are all-countering the menace of tyranny. Recounting the stories of history, the most salient ones, are those that took down the strongmen from its deceitful control.

This article was first published on The Catalyst, June 2019, for a special issue released for President Rodrigo Duterte’s State of the Nation Address (SONA), articulating the impending threats of Charter Change and Federalism on his national agenda.