Palace: Marcos backs Con-Con
‘There are probably instances when, even if certain definitions or terms are clear, they are sometimes muddled to favor someone.’
President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. is open to a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con) if the goal is to clarify and strengthen ambiguous provisions in the 1987 Constitution, Malacañang said Tuesday.
In a press briefing, Presidential Communications Undersecretary and Palace Press Officer Claire Castro said the President would not oppose efforts to remove legal gray areas that could lead to the misuse or misinterpretation of constitutional provisions.
“If this will help clarify and strengthen the provisions so that no part of the Constitution can be exploited, the President will not oppose it,” Castro told reporters.
On Monday, Deputy Speaker and National Unity Party Chairperson Ronaldo Puno renewed calls for a Con-Con to undertake a comprehensive review of the Constitution.
Puno stressed the need to “complete and correct” the Charter, not discard it, and argued that a Con-Con would ensure a “singularity of purpose” in introducing necessary reforms.
While Malacañang has yet to adopt a definitive stance on the proposal, Castro confirmed that the Palace is closely monitoring the development and is awaiting a full proposal.
“There are probably instances when, even if certain definitions or terms are clear, they are sometimes muddled to favor someone,” Castro noted.
She added that revisiting the Charter through a Con-Con would be a valuable chance to gain a clearer understanding of the original intent of the Constitution’s framers.
A Con-Con is one of three legal avenues to amend the Constitution.
Under this method, delegates elected by voters in each legislative district will review and recommend constitutional changes. The other two methods are a constituent assembly—where Congress proposes amendments—and a people’s initiative, which involves gathering signatures through a nationwide petition.
Calls for constitutional reform have long sparked debates in the country, with proponents arguing that outdated or vague provisions hinder governance and development, while critics warn against potential abuse of the process.