Skip to main content

So How's the Impeachment Going, Huh, Die-Hard Defender of the "Infallible" 1987 Constitution of the Philippines?


Some people on Facebook are posting, "No to parliamentary system because we had it during Marcos' time." For the nth time, do I need to keep pointing out the facts that we never had a real parliamentary system? As for those anti-reform advocates who say, "The parliamentary system will worsen the Philippines", I would like to ask, "How is the Sara Duterte impeachment going?" The complaints were passed last December 2024 and again, I would like to ask in Tagalog, "How's the Sara Duterte impeachment going"? 

If we look at the definition, the Encyclopedia Britannica gives this definition of impeachment:
impeachment, in common law, a proceeding instituted by a legislative body to address serious misconduct by a public official. In Great Britain the House of Commons serves as prosecutor and the House of Lords as judge in an impeachment proceeding. In the federal government of the United States, the House of Representatives institutes impeachment proceedings by authorizing a formal inquiry by the House Judiciary Committee, which may then recommend articles of impeachment (an impeachment resolution) for a vote by the full House (articles of impeachment may also be introduced in the House without a formal inquiry). If the articles are approved, a trial is held in the Senate, and conviction is obtained by a vote of at least two-thirds of the senators present. In Great Britain conviction on an impeachment has resulted in fine and imprisonment and even in execution, whereas in the United States the penalties extend no further than removal and disqualification from office. 

In other words, the legislature must wait for the public official to be guilty of serious misconduct. It means that incompetent politicians can still stay in power, as long as they don't commit serious misconduct.

When I propose a vote of no confidence, it's not synonymous with an impeachment trial. In fact, the UK Parliament gives this definition:

A motion of no confidence is a motion moved in the House of Commons expressing lack of confidence in the government or a specific minister.

Having the confidence of the House of Commons has been seen as central to a government's authority to govern in the UK. Traditionally, governments that have lost a confidence vote have either resigned in favour of an alternative administration, or the Prime Minister has requested a dissolution from the Queen, triggering a general election. 

The Parliament of Singapore also gives this definition:

Vote of No Confidence

A motion may be moved by any Member, usually from the Opposition, to seek a vote of no confidence in the Government. 32 An affirmative vote of no confidence by the majority of Members (excluding nominated Members) present signifies that the Government has lost the support of Parliament and the Prime Minister may have to resign. The President may then appoint a new Prime Minister to form a Government or dissolve Parliament for a general election to be called. (See also Vote of Confidence) Art 39 of the CRS.

As the late Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" A. Aquino Jr. (read here) provided his details, he revealed that if the Philippines were truly a parliamentary system, there should have been a vote of no confidence. However, there was none as late Ferdinand E. Marcos Jr. was practically ruling like a king in a kingdom, not a symbolic head of state! 

Andrew James Masigan, a Duterte critic and supporter of Atty. Maria Leonor "Leni" Gerona-Robredo, even said this:

Moreover, since the members of parliament selects the Prime Minister, they can easily remove him through a vote of no-confidence should he fail to fulfill his mandate. We do away with the tedious process of impeachment. And since the ministers are selected from the Parliament, no one gets a free ticket to the Cabinet just because they are friends with the President or nominated by a political ally. The ministers all have mandates and are accountable not only to the PM but to their constituents.

In other words, there would be no room for things like confidential funds. Sara would need to account for her funds, not make them confidential. Sara would need to answer the Opposition. Let's say that our Government is occupied by Uniteam and the Opposition is occupied by the Dilawans. Let's have both Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. and Mrs. Robredo leading their respective teams. For instance, if Sara, as deputy prime minister, fails to fulfill her mandate--Atty. Francis "Kiko" Pangilinan (who's won the race, congratulations and hopefully, he sees the beauty of charter change) could've called for a vote of no confidence against Sara. If Sara loses the confidence of the Philippine Parliament--she would no longer be sititng as Deputy Prime Minister now. If "Bongbong" still insists in his PHP 20.00 per kilo rice--he too can be removed for failing to fulfill his mandate. In a worst-case scenario, the Dilawans may take over the Government, and a new Opposition is formed. 

If the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines were "inviolable", what happened to Article XVII then? Is it now just "good for display" as Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. would like to insinuate? I wonder what Kishore Mahbubani of the National University of Singapore (NUS) has to say about that? Honestly, Mahbubani has been more credible than Davide. Davide speaks ,but where's his evidence? Mahbubani speaks, and Singapore is the evidence.

Labels:

Popular posts from this blog

What's the Use of Complaining About Celebrities and Political Dynasties Running for Politics While DEFENDING Presidential and Rejecting Parliamentary?

2025 is just around the corner for the midterm elections . People keep emphasizing the need to "defend the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines" for any amendments whatsoever. If that were true then we really need to remove Article XVII entirely if the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines was meant to be set in stone (read here ). Several camps whether it's PDP-Laban supporters, Liberal Party of the Philippines supporters, Uniteam supporters, etc.--I can expect social media mudslinging at its finest . I keep talking about the need to amend or even replace the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. However, they keep acting like it's the best constitution in the world, they cite Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. (and others like the Monsods) to idolatrous levels , and when I talk about the parliamentary system--I can expect the whole, "Boohoo! It will never work because we already tried it under Marcos! The proof was Cesar Virata!" However, I wrote a refute on that ...
Read more

No to Cha Cha Because of EDSA?

Back when I was in elementary, we were told that EDSA 1986 was a good thing. I don't want to deny the well-documented human rights abuses of the first Marcos Administration . The repeated call to amend or reform the constitution has unfortunately been demonized as if it's always a bad thing. I guess that's a result of people with poor reading (and listening) comprehension for so long . If only people started to read in-between the details of Philippine history, if only people read through the book From Third World to First and not just quote the late Lee Kuan Yew about the Marcoses, they'll see that using EDSA to demonize charter change is really a bad move. Startling facts during the Marcos Years that may have been ignored by anti-charter change proponents What happened during EDSA was practically a revolutionary government . Above is a video of the late Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. aka Ninoy. I confess that I do tend to admire Ninoy, especially with his Los Angeles sp...
Read more

Why EDSA Should Be a Reason to Support, NOT Oppose Cha Cha

  I don't doubt that the EDSA Revolution left a legacy to the world. Yesterday, I wrote a piece where I asked if EDSA should be a reason to say no to cha-cha . It was a peaceful revolution though it's often argued that the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. didn't want to further ruin his already  tarnished image  in front of the world. How true was it that President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr., in his younger days, wanted to run over the protestors? However, consider EDSA wasn't really one of a kind. The Indian pacifist Mohandas Karamchand "Mahatma" Gandhi, and his  writings inspired the late Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. aka Ninoy . also led a similar revolution against the  unjust  British occupation of India during that time. Gandhi may have been dead by the time Ninoy read about Gandhi. However, Gandhi's peaceful protests left a legacy that was probably not so well-known before. Today, the Indian economy has been doing better than the Philippines. I even consult...
Read more

[OPINION] Why Do Some Filipino Boomers Insist that the Marcos Years Were Under a "Parliamentary System"

  This is a screenshot I got on Facebook. The Tweet is courtesy of Raissa Espinosa-Robles, who I hear is a marites or a gossiper. I'm not denying that there are some truths in what she said. It's true that the Marcos Years have their well-documented human rights abuses. However, Mrs. Robles still continues to insist in the myth of a parliamentary system under Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.'s regime. It's not just Mrs. Robles but also some Filipino boomers who keep saying, "Are you crazy? We had a parliamentary system under Marcos."  I could show them some evidence like Marcos' severe lack of legitimacy to disprove the parliamentary systme. I even wrote about the snap elections because Marcos was a president with powers (read here ). Under a parliamentary system, the president is purely ceremonial. The president is just a door opener and credentials receiver! Benigno Simeon A. Aquino Jr. and Salvador "Doy" Laurel both challenged the legitimacy of Marcos...
Read more

The EDSA Revolution of 1986 Would've Never Happened if People were Stuck in Nostalgia

  It's something that I read crybaby comments online where people are saying, "Making EDSA a special working day is making us forget the glory of EDSA." Please, let me remind people that even 10 years later , neither the late Lee Kuan Yew's birthday nor his death anniversary has become a national holiday in Singapore! Singapore simply honored LKY's birthday by working on that day. I was laughing at the toxic Facebook page called We Are Millennials. What truly made me think that these people are stuck in nostalgia is that EDSA 1986 would never have been possible if the Filipinos were stuck in nostalgia . I remember talks about how the first Marcos administration was built on these two pillars. The first pillar was information control . The other pillar was toxic positivity. I remember back in 1995 when the social studies teacher talked about how he thought that Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. was a "good president" due to the long holidays. However, the holidays ...
Read more