Court ruling may delay PI, says retired SC justice

Retired Supreme Court Associate Justice Adolfo Azcuna on Sunday revealed that the renewed attempt to amend the 1987 Constitution through People’s Initiative will have to settle whether it should be allowed at all — referring to a 1997 decision that the law allowing it only applies to legislation.

Azcuna said the court ruled in Santiago v Comelec that Republic Act 6735, or the Initiative and Referendum Act, is insufficient for constitutional amendments as he stressed that RA 6735 does not prescribe what a petition to amend the Constitution would look like and what it should say.

The 1997 decision was on a petition by People’s Initiative for Reform Modernization and Action, which has revived the campaign in 2024.

The Supreme Court, in Santiago v Comelec, said the poll body “should be permanently enjoined from entertaining or taking cognizance of any petition” on People’s Initiative for constitutional amendment until a “sufficient” law is passed for it.

It also urged Congress to pass a law “to provide for the implementation of the right of the people under that system.”

The current signature campaign seeks to amend the 1987 Constitution to specify that Congress will vote jointly on constitutional amendments and revisions.

Azcuna, a member of the constitutional commission that drafted it, said that section was meant for a unicameral system and that delegates failed to edit it for a bicameral system, which is what the Philippines has now.

He added that the current people’s initiative campaign could be a chance for the Supreme Court to review Santiago v Comelec, noting that 10 justices in the decision on Lambino v Comelec — another attempt at people’s initiative in 2006, disagreed that RA 6735 is insufficient.

Azcuna said the court did not go into Santiago v Comelec in 2006 because it was clear that the Lambino petition was for constitutional revision, which cannot be done through People’s Initiative.

He added that the opinions of the 10 justices on RA 6735 were “ober dictum,” or made in passing, and did not reverse Santiago v Comelec.

Meantime, Commission on Elections chairperson George Garcia said that the poll body has a constitutional duty to accept and process petitions filed before it, adding that the Comelec will then have to check whether any petition is sufficient in form and substance before tasking its regional offices to verify the signatures on the petition.

Garcia said that Comelec has taken the position that it can accept petitions for People’s Initative because of the decision in Lambino v Comelec.

The commission issued Resolution 10650 in January 2020 setting rules and regulations for petitions through RA 6735.

Under those rules, the full text of the proposed amendment to the Constitution must be written on the petition or should be included as an attachment.

To recall, government agencies, including the Department of Health and Department of Social Welfare and Development, have denied reports that aid programs are being used to convince voters to support the People’s Initiative campaign.