One Voice, a multi-sectoral group that is against a bogus people’s initiative, warned the government on the adverse effects of a “fastbreak Cha-cha”, on investors’ confidence in the country as well as on public morale.

“If we are indeed on the verge of an economic take-off, why change all the rules and overhaul the system now?” One Voice asked in its press release. The group maintained that the more prudent course would be to allow the 2007 elections to proceed, and for sober and transparent discussions regarding charter change to follow suit after the elections.

One Voice convener Dr. Rene Azurin of the University of the Philippines, a former member of the Consultative Commission, said the two-pronged approach to a “fastbreak” shift from a presidential-bicameral to a parliamentary-unicameral form of government is filled with inherent dangers.

“It goes against all reasonable standards of public morality that those who are railroading this ‘fastbreak chacha’ are the very same ones who will most benefit from the proposed changes that only increase the power of those who already rule the country. This makes the whole exercise patently self-serving. Those who have been gifted by the Filipino people with government power should not use this power to increase their power even more and eliminate the checks on such power. This only makes it easier for them to push their vested interests at the expense of the general welfare,” Dr. Azurin said.

He said the petition of the Sigaw ng Bayan is geared towards further concentration of powers at a time when existing powers are already being subject to abuse. For example, Azurin said Sigaw’s petition leaves it to the Interim Parliament to decide on when elections for a permanent parliament would be held. “The Interim Parliament composed of incumbent congressmen, senators, as well as other appointees of the President can simply choose to exist till 2010 and beyond under the pretext of constitutional review and deliberations. Within that time, we foresee a period of greater instability because the people’s desire for stronger checks on government shall be frustrated.”

Azurin said he expects the pro-Chacha advocates to railroad a Constituent Assembly even without the institutional participation of the Senate. “My personal reading is that the pro-chacha strategy is to let the Supreme Court reject the People’s initiative petition – thus pacifying oppositors – but then calling on the Supreme Court to uphold the ConAss interpretation that will allow Congress to vote jointly on chacha. If the Supreme Court grants them the second option, then chacha will move at breakneck speed because the House already has a resolution prepared on this matter and before we know it the system of check and balance shall have been weakened or removed.”

One Voice said it is prepared to argue its case before the Supreme Court on the fake people’s initiative based on questions of law: 1) there is no sufficient enabling law on a people’s initiative; and, 2) a people’s initiative is meant to amend, not revise, the Constitution.

The group stressed that there is nothing in the present Constitution that hinders more effective public services and good governance.

According to One Voice, the best mode to change the charter is through a constitutional convention after the 2007 polls and only when incumbent politicians do not benefit from any of these reforms. ###

(Blogger’s Note: This press release was issued by One Voice today, Sunday. Let’s hope it sees print tomorrow.)