From ABS-CBN News: Former Senator Panfilo Lacson echoes Senate President Francis Escudero’s position that the petition filed by Senator Robin Padilla asking the Supreme Court to rule on whether or not the Senate and the House of Representatives have to vote together or not when amending the Constitution is ill timed.
Ping agrees: Robin Padilla’s charter change petition before SC premature
ABS-CBN News, RG Cruz
Published Aug 08, 2024 11:32 AM PHT
Former Senator Panfilo Lacson echoes Senate President Francis Escudero’s position that the petition filed by Senator Robin Padilla asking the Supreme Court to rule on whether or not the Senate and the House of Representatives have to vote together or not when amending the Constitution is ill timed.
“This is one of many reasons why Chiz deserves to be Senate President. In simpler language that non-lawyers like me can understand better, what he is saying is, there is no cause of action. The timing is off.” Lacson said in a blog post.
In his petition for declaratory relief, Padilla sought the “authoritative declaration” of the Supreme Court on issues related to constitutional amendments such as specifics on the required 3/4 vote, if 3/4 votes of the House plus 3/4 vote of the Senate, or 3/4 by the senators with all House members.
Framers of the Constitution have said that the provision had been written while they were contemplating a unicameral legislature and had not been edited to reflect that Congress has two separate co-equal chambers.
Padilla also asked the high court to decide if the Senate and the House of Representatives should jointly convene and assemble when voting to call a constitutional convention or when submitting to the electorate the question of calling such a convention.
The 24-seat Senate has taken the position that voting should be done separately, else they would be outnumbered by the more than 300 members of the House.
On Wednesday, the Senate chief was asked by media for his opinion on Padilla’s case. Padilla is chairman of the Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments.
“Hindi ‘yan kinonsulta o tinanong sa akin o sa sinumang miyembro ng Senado. Hindi ‘yan action ng Senado. Personally, sa aking pananaw, at hindi ko sinasabi na tama ito, sa aking pananaw wala pang jurisdiction ang Korte Suprema dahil premature ang pagkakahain ng kaso dahil wala naman justiciable o controversy na nirerequire ng korte bago ito mag-assume ng jurisdiction sa anumang peitition na inihahain sa kanila.”
The Senate chief told reporters in his personal capacity as a lawyer: “It’s not for me to pre-empt the court. I simply think that it is premature. That is my own legal opinion on the matter.”
Escudero gave an example of an instance when he thinks the Court maybe asked to rule.
“Halimbawa, ‘pag nagkabotohan na kaugnay sa isang constituent assembly resolution. At ang boto ay hindi na-meet yung 3/4 threshold ng Senado man o ng Kongreso. So halimbawa nag-3/4 sa Kamara, hindi nag-3/4 sa Senado. Baka may magkaroon ng kaisipan na, hindi kapag in-add mo 3/4 na. Sasabihin namin, hindi. So, ang Comelec, magdedecide ngayon ise-schedule ba namin o hindi yung plebesito? So, may maghahain ng kaso. Kapag ang Comelec nag-schedule, magpa-file siya ng petition for TRO. Kapag hindi nag-schedule ang Comelec at gusto nilang mag-schedule ang Comelec, magpa-file ng petition for mandamus para i-order ang Comelec na gawin yun. Dun may case or controversy. Pero sa puntong ito, sa aking pananaw ay wala pa.”