Simone Lawson
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines has stood unamended for 37 years, despite several high-profile attempts at reform. The first attempt to amend the constitution was under President Fidel Ramos, who sought to shift to a senatorial system and lift term limits for public officials. However, this effort faced opposition from various groups, including religious organizations and left-wing activists, who argued that the changes would benefit the incumbent. Since then, there have been multiple attempts to amend the constitution, including under President Joseph Estrada and President Rodrigo Duterte, who has been accused of exploiting the weakness of the Philippine party system to build a populist coalition. Despite these efforts, no amendment to the 1987 Constitution has succeeded, and there remains deep distrust and uncertainty surrounding the process of constitutional reform.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Number of years the 1987 Constitution has existed without amendment | 31 years (as of 2018) |
| Number of years the 1987 Constitution has existed without a successful amendment | 37 years (as of 2024) |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The 1987 Constitution has never been amended
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines has never been amended, despite several high-profile attempts to do so. The first attempt was under President Fidel Ramos, who sought to shift to a senatorial system and lift term limits for public officials. However, this effort faced opposition from various groups, including religious organisations and left-wing groups, who argued that the changes would benefit the incumbent. The Supreme Court also dismissed a petition filed by the People's Initiative for Reform, dealing a setback to the amendment process.
Subsequent attempts to amend the 1987 Constitution have also been made under different administrations, including under President Joseph Estrada with the CONCORD (Constitutional Correction for Development) proposal. This proposal aimed to amend only the restrictive economic provisions of the constitution to attract more foreign investments. Once again, objections arose from opposition politicians, religious sects, and left-wing organisations based on concerns such as national patrimony and the self-serving nature of the proposed changes.
In 2005-2006, Sigaw ng Bayan (Cry of the People) campaigned for amendments proposed by the Consultative Commission. They sought to gather enough signatures for a plebiscite on constitutional changes through a People's Initiative. However, this initiative was rejected by the Supreme Court on the grounds of non-compliance with the basic requirements of the Constitution.
More recently, under President Rodrigo Duterte, there has been a continuous push for constitutional reform since 2016. While President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. initially showed non-commitment, he has recently supported efforts to ease constitutional restrictions on foreign investment. Opponents fear that these moves could lead to bigger political changes that may extend his stay in power, similar to the "Cha-cha" in 1973 that legitimised the dictatorship of his father, President Ferdinand Marcos Sr.
Despite these various attempts, the 1987 Constitution remains unamended. This resilience is reflected in a recent survey where 74 per cent of respondents stated that the Constitution should not be amended at any time, a significant increase from the previous year's 31 per cent. The resistance to change underscores the challenges and complexities inherent in the process of constitutional amendment in the Philippines.
Amending the Constitution: Understanding the Process
You may want to see also
Attempts to amend the constitution
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines has never been amended, despite several high-profile attempts since the administration of President Fidel Ramos. Constitutional reform in the Philippines is colloquially known as "Charter Change" or "Cha-cha". Amendments can be proposed by one of three methods: a people's initiative, a constituent assembly, or a constitutional convention. A fourth method, by both houses passing a joint concurrent resolution with a supermajority of at least 75%, has also been proposed. All proposed amendment methods must be ratified by a majority vote in a national referendum.
The first attempt to amend the 1987 Constitution was under President Fidel Ramos. The proposed changes included a shift to a senatorial system and the lifting of term limits for public officials. Ramos argued that these changes would bring more accountability, continuity, and responsibility to the "gridlock"-prone Philippine version of the presidential bicameral system. However, the proposal faced opposition from various groups, including politically active religious organizations, opposition politicians, business tycoons, and left-wing organizations. Critics argued that the changes would benefit the incumbent, Ramos. On September 23, 1997, the Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed by the People's Initiative for Reform, dealing a setback to the advocates of constitutional reform.
Under President Joseph Estrada, there was another attempt to amend the 1987 Constitution, termed CONCORD (Constitutional Correction for Development). The CONCORD proposal aimed to amend only the restrictive economic provisions of the constitution to attract more foreign investments to the Philippines. However, this attempt also faced opposition from similar groups, who argued that the changes would be self-serving and detrimental to national patrimony.
During the term of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, multiple attempts were made to change the 1987 Constitution. In 2005–2006, Sigaw ng Bayan (Cry of the People), led by former Consultative Commission member Atty. Raul Lambino, campaigned for amendments proposed by the Consultative Commission. They aimed to gather enough signatures to call for a plebiscite on the proposed constitutional changes through a People's Initiative. However, this initiative faced opposition from religious, business, and political groups, who argued that it was untimely and would only benefit the incumbent President and her allies by extending the presidential term. On October 25, 2006, the Supreme Court rejected Sigaw ng Bayan's initiative on procedural grounds.
In recent years, there have been renewed efforts to relax constitutional restrictions on foreign investments. President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. has endorsed these initiatives, sparking fears that they could pave the way for more significant political reforms, similar to the constitutional changes that led to the dictatorial regime of his father, Ferdinand Marcos Sr. Opponents of the proposed changes cite deep public distrust, questionable necessity, and significant legal challenges as reasons to resist Charter Change. Despite the best prospects for Cha-cha in years, there remain roadblocks to its final approval via referendum.
Exploring Constitutional Amendments: Understanding Our Guaranteed Rights
You may want to see also
Proposed amendments and their impact
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines has never been amended, despite several high-profile attempts since the Ramos administration. Constitutional reform, colloquially known as "Charter Change" or "Cha-cha", refers to the political and legal processes needed to amend the constitution. Amendments can be proposed by one of three methods: a people's initiative, a constituent assembly, or a constitutional convention. A fourth method, by both houses passing a joint concurrent resolution with a supermajority of at least 75%, has also been proposed. All proposed amendment methods must be ratified by a majority vote in a national referendum.
The first attempt to amend the 1987 Constitution was under President Fidel Ramos. The proposed changes included a shift to a senatorial system and the lifting of term limits for public officials. Ramos argued that these changes would bring more accountability, continuity, and responsibility to the "gridlock"-prone Philippine version of the presidential bicameral system. However, critics, including politically active religious groups, opposition politicians, business tycoons, and left-wing organizations, argued that the changes would benefit the incumbent. On September 23, 1997, the Supreme Court dismissed a petition filed by the People's Initiative for Reform, dealing a setback to the advocates of constitutional reform.
Under President Joseph Estrada, there was another attempt to change the 1987 Constitution through a process called CONCORD (Constitutional Correction for Development). The CONCORD proposal aimed to amend only the restrictive economic provisions of the constitution to attract more foreign investments to the Philippines. However, there was opposition from politicians, religious sects, and left-wing organizations based on arguments of national patrimony and self-serving interests.
In 2005-2006, Sigaw ng Bayan (Cry of the People) campaigned for the amendments proposed by the Consultative Commission. They aimed to gather enough signatures to call for a plebiscite on the proposed constitutional changes through a People's Initiative. However, religious, business, and political groups opposed the proposed amendments, citing untimeliness and arguing that they would directly benefit the incumbent President and her allies by extending the presidential term. On October 25, 2006, the Supreme Court rejected Sigaw ng Bayan's initiative on procedural grounds.
In recent years, there have been renewed efforts to relax constitutional restrictions on foreign investments. President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. has endorsed these initiatives, sparking fears that they could pave the way for more significant political reforms, reminiscent of the constitutional changes that led to his father's dictatorial regime. Opponents worry that easing restrictions on foreign investment in public utilities, higher education, and advertising could be a precursor to bigger political changes aimed at keeping Marcos Jr. in power.
In 2024, there were two parallel efforts to amend the constitution: a formal initiative in Congress for economic liberalization and a People's Initiative for procedural revisions to facilitate easier amendment of the Constitution. The People's Initiative stalled due to revelations of vote-buying and congressional involvement.
Other proposed amendments to the constitution include prohibiting elected officials from switching political parties during the first and last two years of their term and banning political dynasties by barring certain relatives from running for public office simultaneously.
While there is a push for Charter Change, there is also significant resistance. Some widely respected non-partisan figures have expressed a qualified openness to Congress's "Economic Cha-cha." However, deep public distrust, questionable necessity, and significant legal challenges remain roadblocks to its final approval via referendum. Additionally, there are concerns that any amendments could threaten freedoms of expression and assembly by limiting constitutional protections to what State authorities deem "reasonable."
Amendment 20: Understanding the Presidential Transition Amendment
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The process of amending the constitution
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines has never been successfully amended, despite several high-profile attempts since the administration of President Fidel Ramos. Constitutional reform in the Philippines, colloquially known as "Charter Change" or "Cha-cha", refers to the political and legal processes needed to amend the constitution.
There are three methods through which amendments can be proposed: a people's initiative, a constituent assembly, or a constitutional convention. A fourth method has been proposed by House Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr., whereby both houses would pass a joint concurrent resolution with a supermajority of at least 75%. This "simple legislation as the means to amend" would only require approval by both houses voting separately. All proposed amendment methods must be ratified by a majority vote in a national referendum.
The first attempt to amend the 1987 Constitution was under President Fidel Ramos, who proposed a shift to a senatorial system and the lifting of term limits for public officials. Critics argued that these changes would benefit the incumbent, and the proposal was opposed by religious groups, opposition politicians, business tycoons, and left-wing organizations. The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed a petition filed by the People's Initiative for Reform, Modernization, and Accountability on narrow grounds.
Under President Joseph Estrada, there was a similar attempt to change the constitution through a process termed CONCORD (Constitutional Correction for Development). This proposal aimed to amend only the restrictive economic provisions of the constitution to encourage more foreign investment in the Philippines. However, it faced objections from opposition politicians, religious sects, and left-wing organizations based on arguments of national patrimony and self-serving interests.
Sigaw ng Bayan (Cry of the People) campaigned in 2005-2006 for amendments proposed by the Consultative Commission. They aimed to gather enough signatures to call for a plebiscite on the proposed constitutional changes through a People's Initiative. However, the Supreme Court rejected their initiative on the grounds that it failed to comply with the basic requirements of the Constitution for conducting a people's initiative.
In December 2006, House Speaker Jose de Venecia, Jr. attempted to push for constitutional change by convening the House of Representatives and the Senate into a Constituent Assembly, one of the three modes by which the 1987 Constitution could be amended.
In 2024, there were renewed efforts to relax constitutional restrictions on foreign investments, endorsed by President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. Opponents feared that these moves would pave the way for more significant political changes, reminiscent of the constitutional changes that legitimized his father's dictatorial regime. Despite the best prospects for Cha-cha in years, deep public distrust, legal challenges, and the perceived unnecessariness of the proposals have prevented their final approval via referendum.
Understanding the First Amendment: Freedom's Safeguard
You may want to see also
Public opinion on amendments
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines has never been successfully amended, despite several high-profile attempts since the administration of President Fidel Ramos. Under the common interpretation of the Constitution, amendments can be proposed by one of three methods: a people's initiative, a constituent assembly, or a constitutional convention. A fourth method, by both houses passing a joint concurrent resolution with a supermajority of at least 75%, has also been proposed. All proposed amendment methods must be ratified by a majority vote in a national referendum.
Public opinion on amending the Constitution appears to be divided. On the one hand, there is widespread distrust of the "Cha-cha" process, with concerns that it is unnecessary and could be used to serve the interests of those in power. On the other hand, some non-partisan figures have expressed a "qualified" openness to Congress's "Economic Cha-cha."
A 2024 survey found that 74% of respondents believed the Constitution should not be amended, up from 31% the previous year. This sentiment has been interpreted as emboldening the Senate to resist pressure from the House to join its "Cha-cha" push.
There has been opposition to attempts to amend the Constitution from various groups, including religious organizations, opposition politicians, business groups, and left-wing organizations. Critics have argued that proposed amendments would benefit incumbents and could pave the way for more significant political changes, such as extending the President's term in office.
Support for amending the Constitution appears to be driven by a desire to relax constitutional restrictions on foreign investments in public utilities, higher education, and advertising. Proponents of amendment argue that this would open up" the economy and solve an education crisis.
There are also proposed amendments that aim to prohibit elected officials from switching political parties during the first and last two years of their term and to ban political dynasties by barring people related within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity from running for public office simultaneously for more than one national and one regional or local position.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has raised concerns that a proposed amendment to limit the constitutional protection of freedom of expression and assembly to what State authorities deem "reasonable" is incompatible with the Philippines' obligations under international human rights law.
Amendment XII: Congress' Electoral College Overhaul
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The 1987 Constitution has been in place for 37 years as of 2024.
No, there have been several attempts, but none have succeeded.
Amendments can be proposed by one of three methods: a people's initiative, a constituent assembly, or a constitutional convention.
Any proposed amendments must be ratified by a majority vote in a national referendum.
There is a deep distrust of the process, and a perceived unnecessariness of the proposed amendments.
