Real intent behind the PI Provision

Real intent behind the PI Provision

Sep 02

(Blogger’s Note: I am reprinting an excerpt from a column written by my late father, then senator Blas F. Ople, for the Manila Bulletin, dated October 8, 1996. Hopefully, this will give my fellow bloggers and readers a better understanding of what the PI was meant for.)

“In the Constitutional Commission of 1986 I introduced a resolution recognizing the right of the people to revold and overthrow a tyrannical government. This legal innovation inspired by the American Declaration of Independence, however, found little support although an overwhelming majority of my colleagues figured in the EDSA Revolution. They told me that this right was assumed in a democratic Constitution and therefore need not be made explicit.

This idea soon evolved into a more acceptable alternative. I introduced another resolution which built into the Constitution the people’s reserve power to amend the basic law outside the framework of Congress when they become so disillusioned that they could no longer trust their elected officials to represent faithfully their interests.

The resolution this time commanded unanimous support, starting with the committee on constitutional amendments of which Commissioner Jose “Sensing” Suarez of Pampanga was chairman and I was vice chairman. Father Joaquin Bernas, then president of Ateneo de Manila University, sponsored the amendment provision on the floor together with chairman Suarez.

There is therefore no doubt in my mind that the provision for a people’s initiative was designed as a reserve power for the people which was not part of the power surrendered to the lawmaking body. It is a sword in the scabbard for the people to use as they see fit in the future, which can be exercised however only once every five years to deter the merely frivolous and to protect constitutional stability.

The ConCom never intended that a ruling set of leaders should cause a people’s initiative to keep themselves in power.”