PAHRA calls the government to prioritize social justice and human rights NOT CHACHA

on

 
[Statement] on Charter Change ๐Ÿšจ

The Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA) expresses its opposition to the government’s proposed Charter Change.
 
The 1987 Constitution was ratified to safeguard the rights of Filipinos following the numerous human rights violations under Ferdinand Marcos Sr.’s Martial Law regime. It was based on the principles that our rights are immutable and do not defer according to changing ideologies that accompany changes in the administration.
 
The Constitution states in its preamble the Filipino’s aspiration to “establish a Government that shall embody our ideals and aspirations, promote the common good”. It highlights the significance of democracy with people at the center of the law and development.
 
However, the proposed Cha-Cha’s concentration on economic provisions threatens the rights of the Filipinos especially the marginalized. Three main points are of great concern:
 
๐Ÿšจ 100% foreign ownership of key industries
 
Foreign ownership of key industries contradicts the Constitution’s provisions on the State’s duty to regulate and exercise authority over foreign investments with the objective to promote national goals and priorities. Allowing complete foreign ownership could lead to increased economic dependence on foreign investors, making the economy vulnerable to fluctuations in global markets and foreign policies. Granting full ownership to foreign entities may result in a loss of control over strategic industries, resources, and key sectors of the economy— including food and agriculture, energy, healthcare, transportation and many others. This could exacerbate income inequality within the country, as profits may primarily benefit foreign investors rather than local communities. 100% foreign ownership could lead to the displacement or closure of local businesses, particularly smaller enterprises, affecting employment and economic diversity.
 
The Philippine Constitution restricts foreign ownership of investments in certain sectors as a means to safeguard national sovereignty, protect local industries, and promote equitable economic development.
By preserving a certain level of control and ownership in the hands of Filipino citizens or entities, the constitution seeks to promote self-reliance, encourage local entrepreneurship, and mitigate the risks of economic domination by foreign interests. Additionally, it serves to preserve cultural identity, protect natural resources, and maintain stability in strategic sectors such as agriculture, media, and land ownership.
 
๐Ÿšจ Term extension of government officials
 
The inclusion of term limits for public officials in the Philippine Constitution stems from a tumultuous history marked by authoritarian rule and a desire to prevent the consolidation of power within a single individual or family. Following the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos, who held power for over two decades, there was a widespread recognition of the dangers of prolonged incumbency and the potential for abuse of power.
 
Term limits were thus introduced as a safeguard to promote political accountability, prevent the perpetuation of dynastic politics, and foster a more dynamic and inclusive political landscape. By restricting the number of consecutive terms a public official can serve, the intention was to encourage regular turnover in leadership, facilitate the emergence of new voices and ideas, and mitigate the risks associated with entrenched political elites. This historical rationale underscores the commitment to democratic principles and the aspiration for a government that is responsive to the needs and aspirations of the Filipino people.
 
๐Ÿšจ Calls for the government to prioritize social justice and human rights
 
Too often, the pursuit of economic growth and corporate interests overshadows the needs and rights of the populace, leading to systemic inequalities, exploitation, and marginalization.
 
It is important to remember that the state is obligated to respect, protect, and fulfill the human rights of its people. Human rights serve as the foundation upon which just and equitable societies are built, ensuring that every individual is treated with dignity, equality, and fairness. Central to this principle is the recognition that people, not businesses or profit-making entities, should be at the heart of all plans, programs, and development initiatives.
 
In a nation facing myriad challenges, it is imperative for legislators to focus their efforts on addressing pressing issues that directly impact the lives of their constituents. Priority should be given to policy reforms aimed at tackling fundamental concerns such as low wages, the escalating prices of commodities, deficiencies in the health and education systems, inadequate housing programs, and the urgent need to mitigate the effects of climate change.
 
In contrast, proposals for charter change that seek to allow 100% foreign ownership of investments and abolish term limits for public officials divert attention away from these urgent issues. Such changes risk undermining national sovereignty, exacerbating economic inequality, and eroding democratic accountability.
 
As it is, the government including our legislators have shown its failure to uphold and fulfill the mandates enshrined in the existing Constitution. 
 

Comments

Post a Comment