Before anything else, let me declare that I am hoping for a Federal-Parliamentary form of government to come about.
That said, while people are busy working out a new Constitution, perhaps we can also start thinking about some other provisions which might otherwise be simply adopted in toto from the present one.
First, let us get rid of Constitutional officials that are simply a burden to the country and the government.
(photo from getrealphilippines.com)
The position of Vice-President seems to be much more trouble and expense than is worth the effort. In the first place, we are not an empire like the US whereby any vacancy in the Presidency and chain-of-command would pose a serious national security threat.
Even worse, as our system allows a Vice-President from an opposing party, the resulting political tumult this can generate totally undermines the concept for which it was created. Consider the scenario: In case something happens to PRRD, does anyone really think there would be an "orderly transfer of power"?
We would be much better off with making the Prime Minister (in a Parliamentary government) or a similar high government official act as caretaker with Presidential elections to be held within 60 days. Less problems, less expense.
(photo from philnews.ph)
Another bad idea and total waste of government funds that should simply be abolished is the CHR.
Aside from the total absence of any significant POSITIVE accomplishments owing to its faulty conception and utter lack of accountability, it seems to be simply a cosmetic aping of the politically correct libtard thinking that caused the creation of the equally useless and impotent UNCHR.
Are there even any other countries which have such an animal? Certainly, none of the major powers. Has it accomplished anything aside from blowing hot air? At least the ICC has had 1 conviction in 12 years! So, do we need to keep it simply because we are afraid of "what will people say"?
Next, the critical issues of how these Constitutional officials acquire their office, their terms, and how they can be made accountable MUST be thoroughly reviewed and reformed. Our current state of affairs only serves to starkly demonstrate how utterly inadequate and prone to abuse the provisions of the current Constitution are.
Is it really a good idea to have the President simply appoint all these officials who may then simply use their offices to defend his interests to the detriment of the rest of the country?
(photo from philstar.com)
The apparently maneuvered appointment of an unqualified Supreme Court Chief Justice for an incredibly extended term
of office no less, condemns the present process of selection as hopelessly inadequate and prone to abuse.
The current Ombudsman has only shown proficiency in freezing the prosecution or absolving the high officials of the past administration which appointed her while slapping much more serious penalties on everyone else.
The CHR Chairman is notoriously deaf, dumb and blind about abuses of the past administration on innocent victims but is remarkably shrill and condemnatory in his defense of criminals prosecuted by the present one.
(photo from conceptnewscentral.com)
Perhaps worst of all is the COMELEC which is perhaps the least accountable Constitutional body of all considering that the only authority they are accountable to are the very persons they could have cheated for to get into office! Not to mention that the penalties for anomalous actions are vague and ridiculously light vis-a-vis the damage they could cause.
This is the "most perfect Constitution" as described by the person who oversaw its creation? Most perfectly and thoroughly flawed is more like it. Ironically, these are the very offices that are supposed to ENSURE and SAFEGUARD THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF GOVERNMENT!
Certainly, there are better solutions that can be devised to avoid these complications and dilemmas that are at the root of the gravest issues the country faces today.
Other provisions in which the Constitution can be amended are the rights of those accused of crimes and the right to bail.
While the traditional rules for arrest and detention as well as bail are quite fair enough in the case of petty crimes and disputes, these are woefully inadequate and seemingly serve more as an inducement rather than a deterrent for more serious crimes.
Many developed countries have a provision for "investigative detention" whereby a suspect in more serious cases can be held without bail for longer periods of up to two years, subject of course to particular conditions.
While there would inevitably be a hue and cry about possible abuses, this would serve not only as a more palpable deterrent to crimes, especially by the rich and powerful but would also greatly aid the process of investigation by providing a greater measure of security for witnesses and making escape much more difficult. This would also serve as an incentive of sorts to improve prison conditions and speed up the justice system.
Lastly, it would seem only proper that the State impose taxes on religious organizations, particularly those exceeding a particular threshold, perhaps P100M. They would be able to afford it anyway and their organization also benefits from government services as well as feels no restriction in engaging or intervening in partisan politics.
To summarize, these are the basic issues that I would like to advocate:
(1) Abolition of the Vice-Presidency and the Commission on Human Rights
(2) Thorough review and fundamental reform in the manner of appointment, setting of term limits, recourse to accountability and harsher penalties in the event of impeachment/conviction of Constitutional officials.
(3) Provision for a limited period of preventive/investigative detention for more serious crimes patterned after those of other countries.
(4) Taxation of religious organizations with income/assets exceeding a (provisional) threshold of P100M.
It would seem that these amendments alone would go a long way to building the modern, progressive and truly democratic nation that all Filipinos hope to have sooner than later.
