Amending Constitution not a priority – Sen. Imee Marcos
TACLOBAN CITY — While she considers the 1987 Constitution as “anti-Marcos,” Senator Imee Marcos opposed plans to amend it.
Speaking to reporters here earlier this month, Marcos said moves to tinker with the Constitution will not get any majority support from the Senate, saying this early, it’s “dead on arrival.”
“It sounds strange coming from a Marcos given that squarely it is an anti-Marcos document. The 1987 Constitution was (approved) after the 1986 EDSA (Revolution) so many of its provisions are there to prevent another Marcos from coming into power,” the senator said.
The current Constitution was passed in the aftermath of the EDSA People Power that ended the 20-year rule of then President Ferdinand Marcos Sr. whose son and namesake is now the country’s incumbent Chief Executive.
Talks were again fresh to amend the Constitution with Sen. Robinhood Padilla leading the campaign.
Padilla promised that only the economic provisions would be open for amendments.
Several sectors, however opposed it just like in previous Charter Change campaigns.
While she is not totally closing her doors to amend the 1987 Constitution, Senator Marcos said she feels there are more important concerns the country needs to address, including the damage to the economy caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
“The senators are in full view with the President that it (amending the 1987 Constitution) is not a priority. We need to focus on inflation, corruption, jobs and many more important things right now,” she said.
“The damage to our economy due to COVID-19 pandemic is apparent to everyone. We have not recovered yet,” she added.
RELATED STORIES
House opposition finds ally: Paolo Duterte votes vs charter change
Charter change will disrupt national unity, recovery – Lagman
Charter change cost to hit P15 billion
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.