On Monday, members of the House of Representatives expressed their firm support for veteran election lawyer Romulo Macalintal's suggestion that the proposed amendments to the 1987 Constitution should be ratified through a separate plebiscite, not in conjunction with the 2025 elections.

Contrary to President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.'s preference to coincide the Charter change plebiscite with the 2025 local and congressional elections, Macalintal contended that pushing so would be "unconstitutional."

Macalintal's position was deemed a welcome development by the House, which has opposed the synchronization of the plebiscite to the upcoming polls for fear that it might be tainted with political interest.

In a press conference at the House, Deputy Speaker David Suarez raised concern that politicians vying for a spot would take advantage of the push for constitutional amendments.

"It really shouldn't be coincided with the mid-term elections. We cannot allow that the Constitution undergo political mudslinging and be politicized by what happens during a mid-term election where politicians go back and forth," Suarez remarked.

"The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and we have to protect it [and] we have to uphold it. And in doing so, we have to make sure that when we do conduct amendments and go through a plebiscite for it, people's attention and understanding is only focused on what we are talking about," he continued.

House leaders have been calling for an earlier plebiscite to insulate Cha-cha from political innuendos and to be used as a campaign slogan.

The petition, however, met fierce objection in the Senate, affirming Marcos' standpoint that holding the plebiscite simultaneously with the polls would be cost-effective.

Previously, senators alleged that the House is railroading the process because it has a "hidden agenda."

Citing Macalintal's position, Suarez said that hustling the plebiscite has now "legal basis."

Meanwhile, Bataan Rep. Geraldine Roman allayed fears that the House's proposal will go beyond lifting the economic provisions.

"The request of our President and Speaker are clear: purely economic provisions. So, let's put those irrational fears aside if that is preventing us from taking the discussion on RBH 6 in the Senate seriously," Roman said.

Senate's RBH 6 and House's RBH 7 both seek to relax the economic restrictions on foreign ownership in public services, education, and the advertising industry of the 37-year-old Charter said to hamper the country's economic potential.

In the same press conference, La Union Rep. Paolo Ortega and Zambales Rep. Jefferson Khonghun said they are one with their colleagues' appeal that the Cha-cha plebiscite must be held earlier with the mid-term polls.

"The Constitution has to be on a pedestal platform on its own. That's why we have RBH 7 because we are showing that this is a purely economic exercise," Ortega said.

"If we want our constituents to better understand what is being changed in our Constitution, it would be best to separate it and make the plebiscite earlier because it is difficult if it gets involved in politics," Khonghun chimed in.

Commission on Elections chairperson George Garcia earlier said he is in favor of holding the plebiscite concurrently with the 2025 polls because having a separate would cost around P13 billion.