[Statement] on Charter Change 
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:
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.
Term extension of government officialsThe
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.
Calls for the government to prioritize social justice and human rightsToo
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