In the waning days of every administration, there are last-minute designations called midnight appointments. It would seem, though, that there are also "midnight legislation," controversial bills that vested interests, taking advantage of the state of flux engendered by the flurry of activities being undertaken by an outgoing President racing against time to resolve unfinished business before his term ends, lobby for him to sign without the benefit of deep thought and study. Or in the vernacular, inapura. A popular motel chain also had a successful promo called "Midnight Special," but that is a totally different matter altogether (wink).

Going back to midnight laws, methinks one such bill was that which eventually became Republic Act 11659 which, in its title, innocuously says that it is merely "amending Commonwealth Act No. 146, otherwise known as the Public Service Act." Now, legislation is passed all the time amending previous laws, so there's nothing to worry about, right?

Wrong, baby! For RA 11659 not only amends a prior law, it also, in effect, amends the Constitution. And that cannot be done by a mere ordinary act of Congress.

But wait, there's more! The said law also fiddled with one highly important concept in the fundamental law: the constitutional protection afforded that of a "public utility," whose ownership is reserved to "citizens of the Philippines or to corporations xxx at least sixty percentum of whose capital is owned by such citizens xxx."

The term "public utility" has acquired a fixed meaning over time, and under the laws of construction, such meaning should be deemed to have been carried over into the term when used in the Charter.

And "public utility," according to a long line of jurisprudence stretching back to Commonwealth times, are facilities that are "necessary for the maintenance of life and occupation of residents," something that "the public may use by right." This pertains — by long usage and judicial interpretation – to electrical generation, water supply and distribution, mass transport, telecommunications, and supply and distribution of petroleum products, among other things needed for the survival of a nation. Hence, only the most stupid will fail to grasp why the ownership of companies dealing with such matters is left to Filipinos or entities that are majority-owned by Filipinos.

But RA 11659 turns that hypothesis on its head. As it stands, the said law disregards the meaning of "public utility" imbued by the wisdom of our lawmakers and magistrates distilled through a hundred years of experience, and declares in no uncertain terms that railroads, airports, wired or wireless telecommunications, among others, are no longer within the realm of the term "public utilities" and may henceforth be wholly owned by foreigners. To quote the immortal words of the late Batangas Governor Armando Sanchez (a dear friend), "anong kademonyohan ito?"

The danger to national security and the general welfare of the Filipino that will result once that provision is implemented (and it is now being implemented) is too obvious to need a detailed explanation.

What is more, by motu proprio redefining a phrase in the Organic Act, the law has trenched upon the exclusive power of the Judiciary to interpret the law, the Constitution included. To paraphrase the famous leading American case of Marbury v. Madison, it is exclusively the province and duty of the courts to say what the law is.

That is why we hail the United Filipino Consumers and Commuters, led by that patriot Rodolfo Javellana Jr., whose group filed a petition before the High Tribunal seeking to strike down that law for being in contravention of the Constitution. He and his colleagues are the true activists, not those leftists who have been shouting themselves hoarse in the streets, saying the same things over and over for fifty years now. Those bogus nationalists, just like RA 659, bear all the hallmarks of inutility.