Marcos’ reform resolve questioned

Certify the anti-dynasty bill as urgent along with other landmark bills, reform advocates dared President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. yesterday.

Akbayan Partylist Rep. Chel Diokno said there’s a difference between prioritizing bills and certifying them as urgent.

Diokno said he is concerned that the mixed signals from the President could impede the law’s swift passage.

“When the President certifies them as urgent, then we can bypass the constitutional requirement of having separate days for the first, second, and third readings. That’s provided both in the Constitution and in the rules of the House,” he explained.

On Tuesday, Marcos ordered Congress to prioritize four legislative measures to strengthen transparency, accountability, and inclusivity in government.

These priorities were underscored during the second Legislative-Executive Development Advisory Council (LEDAC) meeting held in Malacañang, which highlighted the Anti-Dynasty Bill, the Partylist System Reform Act, and the Independent People’s Commission Act (IPCA).

The IPCA was described by Marcos as a “powerful body” that would investigate illegal infrastructure projects, with a reminder that it must not be used for political persecution.

The fourth act is the Citizen Access and Disclosure of Expenditures for National Accountability (CADENA) Act aimed at ensuring transparency and the responsible use of public funds.

“Unfortunately,” Diokno said, “the President did not certify the measures as urgent. He just said that these would be a priority. We only have six session days before Christmas.”

“Since they haven’t been certified as urgent, we will have to follow the normal procedure. And that’s going to put a lot of time pressure on getting these bills passed,” he said.

Dr. Froylan Kalilong, director of the Local Government Development Institute and a professor at the University of Santo Tomas Political Science Department, said that if the anti-dynasty bill is not considered urgent, the Cadena Act and the Independent People’s Commission could be certified as urgent.

“At the very least, we were able to have two out of four that were certified as urgent here. I think this is what the President should have done,” Kalilong said.

According to Diokno, “Of the four bills that the President said are a priority, to me what we have to really enact immediately is the law giving teeth and creating an Independent Commission Against Infrastructure Corruption (ICAIC).

“There has to be continuity there. Given the recent developments, the resignation of Secretary Babes Sison, announcements that the ICI is going to wind down, it’s so vital that we enact a law creating that independent commission and giving it the power it needs,” Diokno said.

He said the act of defining the bills as the administration’s priority but not giving urgency to their enactment, “makes us really question how serious the administration is about enacting these bills into law.”

“Because it’s such a simple matter to certify them as urgent,” he added.

It’s not only Malacañang or the President that could have certified the bills as urgent, as the House Committee on Rules, through the majority leader, may declare any bill urgent at any time and impose strict timelines.

The independent commission bill, ICAIC, has already passed the committee stage.

“I was part of the committee, even the technical working group. We finished that more than 10 days ago. So we are wondering why that hasn’t yet reached the plenary,” Diokno said.

The bills should go through the Committee on Appropriations and then the plenary.

“But then you have Malacañang already saying that the President felt there was no need to give more powers to the ICI,” Diokno said.

“That’s what really puts us in a terrible quandary, because you have that statement from the President, then you now have him saying this should be a priority measure,” he added.

An independent commission created by law will allow the administration to focus sharply on infrastructure corruption.

“We saw that in the ghost flood control projects. And it’s about time we open this up, get to the bottom of it, and hold people accountable,” Diokno said.

If the President is truly serious about arresting this development of corruption in the country, I think at least two or three of these measures should have been certified as urgent, according to Kalilong.

Shifts in environment

Malacañang said the President supports the proposed anti-dynasty measure, citing shifts in the country’s political environment and growing public clamor for fair governance.

Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Claire Castro said the President’s position reflects concerns about abuses committed by some political figures.

“The political landscape is changing and many are taking advantage. The President is right — the power to vote lies in the hands of the people, but because of this, some abuse it,” Castro told reporters.

She added, “The President wants to convey to the people that you have a choice, a choice based on merit, not merely because you share the same last name.”

Marcos’s earlier stance during his 2022 presidential campaign, when he asserted that there was “nothing wrong” with political dynasties and argued that elections were the best way to address the issue.

Meanwhile, former Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Carpio welcomed the priority bills laid down by President Marcos, particularly the anti-political dynasty bill.

“Well, we welcome that. That has been our advocacy for so long,” said Carpio, adding, “It is an excellent development as there are many bills already filed before the House of Representatives.”

Carpio said the anti-dynasty bill should cover relatives within the fourth civil degree, with one at the national level and one at the local level in local government units (LGUs).

On the other hand, Carpio also aired his take on the proposed revamp of the party-list system.

“Under the Constitution, for the first three terms of Congress, there shall be a partylist system reserved for the marginalized, but only one-half,” he said.

He said it is a wrong impression that if one is under a partylist, one is only marginalized, and the solution is the political dynasty provision.

Proper labeling needed

For Senate President Vicente Sotto III, defining the term “political dynasty” is crucial to avoid ambiguities that could create loopholes or legal challenges.

“We will discuss this thoroughly. As the President mentioned earlier and as we agreed, the key is first to define what a political dynasty is. Once we define that, the rest will be easier,” Sotto said.

On Tuesday, Sotto, along with other leaders of both chambers, held a LEDAC meeting with the President during which key legislative measures were identified as priorities.

Several versions of anti-dynasty bills are currently pending in both chambers of Congress.

Senator Risa Hontiveros introduced Senate Bill 1548, also known as the Kontra Dinastiya Act, which seeks to prohibit political dynasties by restricting spouses and relatives up to the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity of incumbent officials from running for or holding office.

The bill also extends the ban to the party-list system, aiming to promote leadership based on merit rather than family connections.

Senator Francis Pangilinan filed a version that limits the degree of consanguinity and affinity among relatives seeking office.

His proposed measure is titled “An Act Defining and Prohibiting Political Dynasties, Providing Penalties Therefor, and for Other Purposes.”

The proposed measure would ban individuals within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity from simultaneously holding or running for public office.

Pangilinan said the bill is intended to “level the playing field” in politics and prevent political power from being concentrated among a few privileged families.

Good signal

For Senator Bam Aquino, passing the bill could be challenging, though backing from the Office of the President could significantly boost its chances.

When asked about the chances of the measure’s passage, Aquino said, “Well, honestly, before yesterday’s news, I would have said, ‘It might really be difficult,’ even though we also filed our own version of the anti-political dynasty bill.”

On the possibility of certifying the bill as urgent, Aquino noted that while it could bypass the usual three-day rule, it is not strictly necessary at this stage.