Court junks 2 ‘premature’ petitions vs con-ass

(Updated 8:48 p.m.) MANILA, Philippines – The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday junked two petitions seeking to nullify a controversial House resolution that seeks to convene lawmakers into a constituent assembly to amend the 1987 Constitution. In a unanimous decision penned by Chief Justice Reynato Puno, the SC said the petitions filed separately by lawyer Oliver Lozano and businessman Louis Biraogo were premature and lacked legal standing. “A careful perusal of their petitions would reveal that they cannot hurdle the bar of justiciability set by this Court before it will assume jurisdiction over cases involving constitutional disputes," read the eight-page resolution. The high court noted that the House of Representatives had not yet committed an act that would create a justiciable controversy warranting the SC’s intervention. "Thus, no usurpation of power of gross abuse of discretion has taken place," it said. Lozano immediately appealed the ruling and argued that allowing a constituent assembly to convene without the participation of the Senate would pave the way for President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to extend her term beyond 2010. Lozano’s motives have been questioned because of his previous acts of initiating “pre-emptive" impeachment proceedings before Congress against President Arroyo that derailed the filing of a more substantial impeachment complaint. Biraogo made headlines early 2009 by alleging that Chief Justice Reynato Puno sat on a disqualification case against Negros Oriental Rep. Jocelyn Limkaichong. He is under investigation for obtaining a “draft decision" from the Supreme Court in an election case. 'Social volcano' In his motion for consideration, Lozano cited Puno’s earlier pronouncement that Filipinos need to heal the wounds of disunity since the country’s “social volcano" is on the verge of eruption. Biraogo likewise contested the SC's decision. "Bakit mawawalan ng legal standing eh I am a taxpayer? [How can they say it lacks legal standing when I am a taxpayer?]," he told GMANews.TV in a phone interview. But the court ruled that the petitioners cannot claim that they are making the move as taxpayers and concerned citizens, noting there has been no allocation or disbursement of public funds yet. Unconstitutional Two weeks ago, Lozano and Evangeline Lozano-Endriano asked SC to nullify House Resolution 1109 because it would allegedly pave the way for President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to extend her term beyond 2010. The petitioners said HR 1109 was unconstitutional and would only render the Senate “inutile" because once Congress votes jointly, senators would be outnumbered by their House counterparts. Biraogo followed suit on June 5, filing a petition for certiorari to nullify HR 1109. The petition also sought to prevent House Speaker Prospero Nograles "and his deputies, subordinates and representatives" from enforcing the controversial resolution. Administration critics raised fears that a “justiciable controversy" would spring up from Lozano and Biraogo’s petitions, compelling the high court to clarify once and for all whether Congress should vote jointly or separately when effecting specific changes in the Charter. Government critics have likewise suspected that the Supreme Court might vote in favor of HR 1109 since a majority of the magistrates are Arroyo appointees. Anticipated For his part, Nograles said the SC's ruling was "legally anticipated" and echoed that the petitions were filed prematurely. "There will be a justiciable issue only when con-ass is convened and proposed specific amendments are made. It's like all the rallies and the lightning protests the militants and those who want to run next year are making, including some of the bishops — it's all just noises, and it's all premature," he said in a text message to reporters. He was referring to last Wednesday's (June 10) rally against Charter change in Makati City, which was attended by religious, political and militant organizations that believe that moves to amend the Charter are meant to prolong President Arroyo's term. Bayan Muna Rep. Teodoro Casiño, one of the staunchest opponents of the con-ass proposal, expressed fears that the high court's dismissal of the measure might be "spinned" by con-ass proponents to make it appear that HR 1109 has been upheld by the high court. "Lozano's petition was obviously designed to fail so that its dismissal can be used to justify Lakas-Kampi's next step, which is the immediate convening of the House con-ass," Casiño said in a separate text message to reporters. House leaders and political party heads will consult with each other on the House next's step before the resumption of Congress session, which will take place after President Arroyo's State of the Nation Address (SONA) in July. Nograles and other con-ass proponents, however, have earlier said the House might convene into a constituent assembly after the SONA. Silent Senate The Senate, meanwhile, which will be excluded from the constituent assembly once it is convened, said there was nothing surprising about the SC ruling. “Expected na namin yun kaya hindi kami kumibo dito sa Senado e [We were expecting that that's why we did not bother to act on that petition]. I already told my companions here in the Senate that there's no need for us to question anything. We'll just sit down. Nothing will happen," Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said. - Mark Merueňas, Johanna Camille Sisante, Sophia Dedace and Amita Legaspi, GMANews.TV