SCUTTLEBUTT

Among the hottest topics at the Trillion Peso March at the EDSA People Power Monument was the launch of a People’s Initiative (PI) to enact laws by gathering enough signatures nationwide. These will no longer pass through politicians but will come directly from the people.

The main laws to be enacted include the Anti-Political Dynasty Law, the disqualification of politicians from elected posts if they have unliquidated funds, participatory audit to monitor government spending, open infrastructure deals, Freedom of Information, public access to Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net worth, beneficial ownership law to identify individuals profiting from big government contracts, and procurement monitoring with standard costing.

To ensure that these reforms are realized, the PI was proposed as a direct path toward change.

If the people rely on Congress, which is controlled by dynasties, reforms will always be blocked, according to participants in the mammoth anti-corruption rally last Sunday.

If the people themselves file the laws, politicians will have no choice but to listen. Without the PI, which is provided under the Constitution, Filipinos will remain captive to dynasties and impunity.

The PI is a constitutional mechanism enshrined in Article XVII, Section 2 of the 1987 Constitution that allows citizens to directly propose amendments to the Constitution or enact new laws through petitions signed by registered voters.

This “power of the people” was designed after the People Power Revolution in 1986 to empower direct democracy alongside Congress’s legislative authority.

It is implemented via Republic Act 6735 (the Initiative and Referendum Act of 1989), which requires at least 12 percent of total registered voters nationwide (with 3 percent per legislative district) for constitutional amendments and 10 percent for statutory measures.

If the petition qualifies, the Commission on Elections shall verify signatures and hold a referendum or plebiscite.

However, the PI has rarely succeeded due to logistical challenges, high thresholds, and legal hurdles. In practice, it has been more of a tool for public mobilization and political pressure than for actual lawmaking.

It was previously employed to ram through amendments to the Constitution, which the public viewed with suspicion and, thus, never succeeded.

It may have a different fate this time when the genuine needs of the public are at stake.