Home 
Was it Will Rogers who once cracked that the Constitution protects aliens, drunks and congressmen?
Perhaps, that includes the over 167 congressmen who’ve whipped themselves into a frenzy over assembling in a constituent assembly? A "con-ass is where members anoint themselves to rewrite the Constitution — and extend their terms, among other things.
The Senate has already signaled it won’t play ball. Congressmen outnumber senators ten-to-one. So, senators will demand a separate, not a joint vote on charter change. It’s, therefore, likely the congressmen won’t get their joint vote. So, they’ll hotfoot it to the Supreme Court to seek a "friendly" decision.
What are their chances? Good, they figure. After all seven of 15 justices will retire in 2009. They bet the President will appoint "pliant" replacements. Thus, a "friendly" decision could come before 2010. That’s when terms of office for legislators — and the President, of course — peters out.
"(The) Constitution was not written in the sands to be washed away by each new wave of judges, blown in by each successive political wind," Justice Hugo Black once wrote.
"Justice who?" shrug the main peddlers for this ‘con ass" option . They belong to the country’s number one political dynasty: The President’s sons, Reps. Juan Miguel and Diosdado Arroyo, plus their uncle, Rep. Luis Arroyo Regime stalwarts Speaker Prospero Nograles and Rep. Luis Villafuerte ride shotgun for them.
They all peddle the same line: A new constitution, that could shift to a parliamentary system, will also usher in deferred hopes of this country for economic stability and expanding freedoms.
Their frenzied jockeying runs parallel to the "read my lips" act by Anthony Golez, deputy spokesperson of Ms Arroyo. "The President will step down after 2010. (This is) doomed because the people will oppose this. They don’t want any term extension."
Is this nod towards the mounting opposition of the plan to ram through charter-change a ploy? Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales, earlier, denounced the move as "self-serving. Social Weather Stations found that 63, out of every 100 respondents oppose tinkering with the constitution now. That resistance, in fact, has persisted over the last eight surveys.
Look at the Brits. England never had a written constitution. Yet, its writ reaches throughout the realm. Indeed, a constitution "sums up, in legal form, the moral judgment a community has reached."
Americans amend their constitution on basic issues. The First Amendment, for example, covered freedom of speech, etc. The Chinese scrapped Mao Ze Dong’s once-sacrosanct strictures and tacked on a provision guaranteeing private property. "It’s glorious to be rich," Deng Hsiao Peng proclaimed.
Filipinos, in contrast, itch to keel-haul constitutions. An irate public clobbered Fidel Ramos forcing him to scrap a revision of the charter for a crack at a second term. People Power II ousted the often-soused Joseph Estrada just when he made tentative stabs at charter overhaul. Ferdinand Marcos’ "Transitory Provisions" locked in his 14-year dictatorship.
"A society in which men recognize no check upon their freedom soon becomes a society where freedom is the possession of only a savage few, as we have learned to our sorrow," the late Justice Learned Hand said in a May 1944 address.
Today, opposition leaders zipper their keep lips about charter change. The status quo suits Mar. Loren, Manny and other presidential aspirants just fine, as it does the President. She won’t stop her sons from pressing cha-cha. "Everybody has the right to do whatever they feel is within their democratic rights," Press Secretary Jesus Dureza mumbles.
A constitution is a "repository for a nation’s ideals, the beliefs that it cherishes, and its permanent hopes." It’s not engraved in stone. Nor is it perfect. And it should be revised, given a changing world and the people’s own experience.
But the last thing to do is rewrite it in haste. And "con-ass" would be "a place where Jesus Christ and Judas Iscariot would be equals; but the betting odds would be stacked in favor of Judas."
In a constitutional convention, reason, free of passion, stands a better chance CBCP president Angel Lagdameo thinks. So do an overwhelming number of civil society groups and citizens. They propose this drill come after the 2010 elections.
Elect delegates to a constitutional convention in tandem with candidates in the 2010 elections, suggests former UP president Jose Abueva. That’ll save expense for a separate con-con election. The 1987 Constitution does not need to be rewritten entirely. It has many good provisions that deserve to be retained. So, the con-con needs funding only for six or eight months.
But the "irresistible force" of Malacañang ambition is already bucking the "immovable force" of public distrust. Tensions are ratcheting. A noise barrage has erupted. The first of interfaith rallies to protest is planned. "We’ll join that one even if I have to walk with my cane," said former senator Vicente Paterno.
“I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws, and upon courts,” Justice Learned Hand mused on that warm May morning 64 years ago. These are false hopes, believe me. These are false hopes.
“Freedom lies in the hearts of men and women,” he stressed. “When it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to save it."
