BEYOND THE BEND: Is there a calamity or emergency in BARMM?

MELBOURNE, Australia (MindaNews / 24 Feb) — President Bongbong Marcos certified as urgent the bills postponing the first regional parliamentary election in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM). Begging the question, is there a calamity or emergency in the BARMM that justifies the shortening of the legislative process?

It always seems easy for legislators from both chambers of Congress to support an unconstitutional act. Presumably because they will benefit from it. Although it is also possible that some of them may not be aware of the constitutional provision that mandates three readings on separate days and the only exception to this rule.

To remind the public and our lawmakers, as per Article VI, Section 26 (2):

“No bill passed by either House shall become a law unless it has passed three readings on separate days, and printed copies thereof in its final form have been distributed to its Members three days before its passage, except when the President certifies to the necessity of its immediate enactment to meet a public calamity or emergency.”

Every bill must be read three times on separate days. This requirement aims to ensure that lawmakers have thoroughly studied and deliberated every piece of legislation that comes out of Congress. Indeed, the job of lawmaking is a problem-solving profession. Such is the standard of work to be expected from members of the legislature.

Problem-solvers need data to come up with solutions. This is essentially the purpose of the power to conduct inquiries in aid of legislation, which is an integral component of the legislative process. As per the case of Senate vs. Executive Secretary:

“Inquiries in aid of legislation serve as tools to enable the legislative body to gather information and, thus, legislate wisely and effectively; and to determine whether there is a need to improve existing laws or enact new or remedial legislation, albeit the inquiry need not result in any potential legislation.”

The exception to this “3 readings on 3 separate days” rule is when there is an urgent need to enact a law to address a public calamity or emergency. Note that the law itself is required to meet the exigencies arising from the calamity or emergency. Obviously, not every quick response to the latter would require legislation. But police power measures and funding provisions to address the crises will still need statutory imprimatur. A swifter method is allowed for this contingency.

Bear in mind that the words “calamity or emergency” must be plainly understood. The use of these words in the Constitution bears no technical meaning. A calamity is commonly known as an event causing great and often sudden damage or distress. For instance, disasters like an earthquake, tsunami, or super-typhoons. Whereas an emergency is a serious, unexpected, and often dangerous situation requiring immediate action. Examples would be a localized armed attack, a nationwide bank failure, or a massive power outage.

Setting aside for the moment the questionable constitutionality of the now postponement law (RA No. 12123), it is only prudent for the BARMM electorate to ask, what is the rationale for postponing the regional parliamentary elections for the second time? What problem is it trying to solve? More critically, is a second postponement potentially detrimental to regional autonomy?

The proponents of postponement insists that the Bangsamoro Transition Authority (BTA) needs more time to address various issues in the region such as the removal of the Province of Sulu from the BARMM. Note that the BTA is not an elected body. Its members, including the Chief Minister, are all appointed by the President. Which means, it is principally beholden to the latter and not to people of the BARMM.

Understandably, autonomy advocates argue that another postponement only perpetuates the control of the national government over the region, comparing it to how the President actually relates to other regions. For them postponement suppresses BARMM autonomy, whereas pushing through with the election keeps the region squarely on the path towards meaningful autonomy. Obviously, this is still a long road ahead, and taking the first steps is always the hardest.

Pertinently, an elected regional parliament would not be any less equipped to deal with the multitude of concerns facing the BARMM. And the election of a true Bangsamoro parliament does not dissolve the partnership between the national and regional governments in resolving both immediate and intergenerational issues faced by the region. More importantly, this revolutionary electoral exercise is integral to the Bangsamoro’s right to self-determination.

Postponing the BARMM regional parliamentary election again essentially ignores this passage from the decision in the landmark case of Disomangcop vs. Datumanong:

“The objective of the autonomy system is to permit determined groups, with a common tradition and shared social-cultural characteristics, to develop freely their ways of life and heritage, exercise their rights, and be in charge of their own business. This is achieved through the establishment of a special governance regime for certain member communities who choose their own authorities from within the community and exercise the jurisdictional authority legally accorded to them to decide internal community affairs.”

Indeed, the real calamity in the BARMM is that many of its political leaders remain bound to that umbilical cord attached to Malacañang. To severe this dependence is not easy, for sure. But the first painful cut will be when the Bangsamoro peoples elect their very own parliament. Will that happen in October? Hopefully. But who knows what the Marcos administration would be feeling when that time comes.

(MindaViews is the opinion section of MindaNews. Michael Henry Yusingco, LL.M is a law lecturer, policy analyst and constitutionalist.)