The tumultuous years of Martial Law Philippines under Ferdinand E. Marcos fundamentally altered the political and legal landscape of the archipelago. When the EDSA People Power Revolution erupted in February 1986, bringing an end to decades of authoritarian rule, the Philippines stood at a critical juncture. The urgent task facing the new government led by Corazon Aquino was not merely to replace a regime but to dismantle its legal and structural foundations and embark on a profound restoration of democracy. Central to this monumental undertaking was the creation of a new charter – the 1987 Philippine Constitution. More than just a legal document, this Post-Marcos Constitution was envisioned as the embodiment of the nation’s aspirations for freedom, justice, and accountability, explicitly designed for shaping Philippine law through firmly re-established democratic values.
This article delves into the intricate process of crafting the 1987 Philippine Constitution, examining the historical context that necessitated its creation, the composition and deliberations of the Constitutional Commission, the key provisions reflecting the nation’s democratic ideals, and its enduring impact on the Philippine legal system and society. Understanding this period is vital to appreciating the evolution of the Philippine state and the continuous struggle to uphold the principles enshrined by the sovereign people.
The Shadow of Martial Law and the Need for a New Charter
The declaration of Martial Law in 1972 by Ferdinand Marcos marked a radical departure from the democratic framework established by the 1935 Constitution. Marcos justified this move by citing a supposed threat of communist insurgency and civil unrest. What followed was an era of concentrated power in the executive, suppression of dissent, and widespread human rights abuses.
The 1973 Constitution: A Framework for Authoritarian Rule
One of the significant legal instruments used to consolidate Marcos’s power was the 1973 Constitution. Drafted under controversial circumstances during the early period of Martial Law, it replaced the American-era 1935 Constitution. While ostensibly shifting the Philippines towards a parliamentary system, it was effectively manipulated to legitimize Marcos’s authoritarian control. The transition clauses granted him extraordinary powers, allowing him to rule by decree, dismantle the legislature, and control the judiciary. This constitution became synonymous with the Marcos regime’s legal framework, starkly contrasting with traditional democratic values like separation of powers and checks and balances. It stripped away many protections for human rights and expanded the state’s power over individual liberties.
The Fall of Marcos and the Rise of People Power
Decades of suppressed discontent, economic woes, and political repression culminated in the 1986 snap election and the subsequent EDSA People Power Revolution. Millions of Filipinos took to the streets, demanding an end to the Marcos dictatorship. This peaceful uprising, supported by segments of the military, successfully forced Marcos to flee the country, ushering in a new era. The magnitude of this event underscored the power of the sovereign people to reclaim their democratic rights.
The Freedom Constitution: A Provisional Measure
Upon assuming the presidency, Corazon Aquino faced the immediate challenge of governing a nation recovering from authoritarianism and operating under a constitution that had been the legal basis of the dictatorship. Recognizing the 1973 Constitution’s lack of legitimacy and its incompatibility with the restoration of democracy, Aquino issued Proclamation No. 3, which promulgated the “Freedom Constitution.” This was a provisional constitution that effectively abrogated certain provisions of the 1973 Constitution, including the one granting Marcos legislative power, and adopted others necessary for an orderly transition. While temporary, the Freedom Constitution served its purpose by providing a legal basis for the Aquino government and paving the way for the drafting of a more permanent and democratic charter. It allowed for the re-establishment of fundamental freedoms and initiated the process for convening a Constitutional Commission.
The need for a new constitution was paramount. The 1973 Constitution was tainted by its association with the dictatorship and failed to embody the democratic values for which the people had fought. A new charter was required to:
- Restore and strengthen democratic institutions.
- Enshrine and protect fundamental human rights and civil liberties.
- Establish robust mechanisms for checks and balances to prevent the concentration of power.
- Reflect the will and aspirations of the sovereign people.
- Provide a stable legal foundation for the new democratic government and for shaping Philippine law moving forward.
Convening the Constitutional Commission: Representatives of the Sovereign People
To draft this vital document, President Aquino appointed a Constitutional Commission (Con-Com). Unlike previous constitutional conventions, the members of the Con-Com were appointed rather than elected. This decision was made to expedite the process and ensure the participation of diverse sectors and experts who might not have otherwise sought election. The appointment of the commission was seen as an exercise of the revolutionary government’s power, legitimized by the mandate of the EDSA People Power Revolution.
Composition and Mandate of the Con-Com
The Constitutional Commission was composed of 50 members, carefully selected to represent various walks of life and political leanings – legal experts, academics, religious figures, businessmen, labor leaders, and former politicians, including some who had opposed the Marcos regime and some who had served within it. The commission was chaired by former Supreme Court Justice Cecilia Muñoz-Palma, a respected figure known for her integrity and courage, who had been one of the dissenting voices in the Marcos-era judiciary.
The mandate of the Con-Com was clear: to draft a new constitution for the Republic of the Philippines that would embody the ideals of the EDSA People Power Revolution and establish a truly democratic government. The process began in June 1986 and involved months of rigorous debates, public hearings, and consultations.
Key Figures and Diverse Perspectives
The composition of the Constitutional Commission reflected the diverse opinions and interests within post-EDSA Philippines. While united by the goal of restoring democracy, members held differing views on various issues, leading to lively and often passionate debates. Prominent members included legal scholars like Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J., and Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr., human rights advocates, economists, and representatives from different political spectrums.
The presence of individuals with varying experiences, including those who had been victims of Martial Law and those who had worked within the previous system, ensured a broad range of perspectives were considered. Debates often centered on crucial topics such as the form of government (presidential vs. parliamentary), the scope of the Bill of Rights, provisions on social justice, economic policies, and mechanisms to prevent the resurgence of authoritarianism and address issues like political dynasty.
The deliberations were conducted in a transparent manner, with sessions open to the public and covered by the media. This transparency was crucial in building public trust and ensuring that the resulting document would truly represent the aspirations of the sovereign people.
Debates and Deliberations: Infusing Democratic Values
The core of the Constitutional Commission‘s work involved intense debates and careful deliberations on the principles that would underpin the new charter. The overriding goal was to create a constitution that would not only restore but strengthen democratic values and institutions that had been eroded under Martial Law.
The Bill of Rights: Reinforcing Fundamental Liberties
A cornerstone of the 1987 Philippine Constitution is its expanded and strengthened Bill of Rights. Learning from the abuses of the Martial Law era, the commission meticulously drafted provisions to safeguard individual liberties. This included reinforcing fundamental rights such as freedom of speech, expression, the press, assembly, and petition; the right against unreasonable searches and seizures; the right to due process and equal protection of the laws; and the right to bail. New provisions were also introduced or strengthened, such as the right to information on matters of public concern and the abolition of the death penalty (though it was later reinstated by Congress).
The emphasis on human rights in the 1987 Constitution was a direct response to the systemic violations that occurred under the previous regime. The Bill of Rights was seen not just as a set of legal protections but as a moral compass for the state, ensuring that the government would always respect the inherent dignity and rights of its citizens.
Checks and Balances: Limiting Executive Power
A critical lesson from the Marcos years was the danger of concentrated executive power. The Constitutional Commission placed great emphasis on restoring and enhancing the system of checks and balances among the three branches of government: the executive, legislative, and judiciary. The aim was to prevent any single branch from becoming overly dominant.
- Legislative Oversight: The restored bicameral Congress was given robust oversight powers over the executive. This included the power to approve the budget, conduct investigations in aid of legislation, and the power of impeachment against the President, Vice President, members of the Supreme Court, and heads of Constitutional Commissions.
- Judicial Review: The powers of the Supreme Court were significantly strengthened, particularly its power of judicial review. The court was explicitly granted the authority to determine whether there has been a grave abuse of discretion on the part of any government branch or instrumentality. This elevated the judiciary to a powerful check on both the executive and legislative branches, a vital safeguard against potential abuses of power witnessed under Martial Law Philippines.
Separation of Powers: Defining Government Branches
Hand in hand with checks and balances is the principle of separation of powers. The 1987 Constitution clearly delineated the distinct roles and responsibilities of the legislative (Congress), executive (President and the Cabinet), and judicial (Supreme Court and lower courts) branches. While separate, the system was designed for interdependency through the mechanisms of checks and balances, ensuring cooperation while preventing encroachment. This structure aimed to prevent the kind of executive dominance that characterized the Ferdinand Marcos regime.
Civilian Supremacy and the Role of the Military
Given the military’s crucial role in the EDSA People Power Revolution but also its instrumentalization during Martial Law, the Con-Com debated the relationship between civilian government and the armed forces. The constitution explicitly enshrines the principle of civilian supremacy over the military. This was a deliberate move to ensure that the armed forces would remain subordinate to the duly elected civilian government, a fundamental tenet of democratic values. While recognizing the military’s role in national defense, the constitution placed it firmly under the authority of the President, who is the Commander-in-Chief, and subject to civilian control.
Provisions on Social Justice and Human Rights
Beyond political rights, the 1987 Philippine Constitution placed significant emphasis on social justice and human rights. Articles were dedicated to promoting a more equitable distribution of wealth and opportunities, protecting labor rights, recognizing the rights of indigenous peoples, promoting health and education, and advancing agrarian and urban land reform. These provisions reflected a recognition that true democracy requires not just political freedom but also economic and social equity. The inclusion of specific articles on social justice was a response to the perceived inequalities that contributed to the unrest prior to and during Martial Law.
Addressing Political Dynasties and Electoral Reforms
The issue of political dynasty, a pervasive feature of Philippine politics often seen as hindering genuine representation and fostering corruption, was also debated. While a complete prohibition was not enacted due to differing views within the commission and potential enforceability challenges, the constitution includes a provision directing Congress to define and prohibit political dynasties by law. This article remains a subject of ongoing debate and legislative efforts.
Furthermore, the constitution mandated various electoral reforms aimed at ensuring cleaner and more credible elections, strengthening the COMELEC (Commission on Elections), and promoting party-list representation to allow marginalized sectors a voice in Congress. These reforms were intended to prevent the electoral manipulation that was characteristic of the Marcos era.
Key Provisions and Innovations of the 1987 Constitution
The final output of the Constitutional Commission was a comprehensive document comprising 18 articles. It introduced several significant changes and restored features absent in the 1973 Constitution, solidifying its role in shaping Philippine law towards a democratic framework.
Restoring the Bicameral Congress
The 1973 Constitution, while theoretically parliamentary, had effectively abolished the Senate under Marcos’s rule. The 1987 Philippine Constitution unequivocally restored a bicameral Congress, consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives. This structure provides a system of checks and balances within the legislature itself and allows for broader representation and more thorough legislative scrutiny.
Strengthening the Judiciary: Judicial Review
As mentioned, the empowerment of the judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court’s expanded power of judicial review, was a crucial innovation. This power allows the Supreme Court to strike down laws, executive orders, and other government actions that are unconstitutional, serving as a vital safeguard against potential abuses by the political branches. This was a deliberate attempt to prevent the judiciary from being subservient to the executive, as was perceived to have happened during Martial Law.
Independent Constitutional Commissions
The constitution also established or strengthened independent Constitutional Commissions: the Commission on Elections (COMELEC), the Civil Service Commission (CSC), and the Commission on Audit (COA). These bodies are designed to be independent of the political branches to effectively perform their mandates – ensuring free and fair elections, maintaining a professional civil service, and safeguarding public funds, respectively. Their independence is a key mechanism for promoting accountability and good governance, essential elements of democratic values.
National Economy and Patrimony Provisions
Article XII on National Economy and Patrimony laid down principles aimed at promoting a self-reliant and independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos. It included provisions on the conservation and utilization of natural resources, the regulation of monopolies, and the protection of Filipino enterprises. While subject to varying interpretations and legislative enactments over the years, these provisions reflect a nationalist orientation and the goal of ensuring that the nation’s resources primarily benefit the sovereign people of the Philippines.
To illustrate some of the key differences and shifts in the constitutional framework, a comparison between the post-war Philippine Constitutions is helpful:
| Feature | 1935 Constitution | 1973 Constitution (as amended) | 1987 Constitution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Form of Government | Presidential | Parliamentary (nominally, effectively authoritarian presidential under Marcos) | Presidential |
| Legislature | Bicameral (Senate & House) | Unicameral (Batasang Pambansa), Senate abolished for a period | Bicameral (Senate & House) |
| Executive Power | President (with checks) | Strong President (with decree powers under Martial Law) | President (with stronger checks and balances) |
| Judicial Power | Judiciary (with judicial review) | Judiciary (powers curtailed/influenced) | Independent Judiciary (expanded judicial review) |
| Bill of Rights | Guaranteed (based on US model) | Curtailed under Martial Law | Expanded and strengthened |
| Sovereignty | Resides in the people | Declared in the people | Explicitly resides in the people |
| Martial Law | Provided for presidential declaration | Used to justify authoritarian rule | More restrictions on presidential declaration |
| Constitutional Commissions | None explicitly named as independent | Some created, but less independent | COMELEC, CSC, COA (Independent and strengthened) |
| Social Justice | General principles | Some provisions | Extensive provisions |
| Political Dynasties | Not directly addressed | Not addressed | Mandates Congress to prohibit by law |
Export to Sheets
This table clearly shows the deliberate shift back to a presidential system with a bicameral legislature and significantly reinforced safeguards against the concentration of power, reflecting the painful lessons learned from the Martial Law period and the commitment to democratic values.
Ratification and Implementation: Embracing the New Charter
Upon its completion, the draft constitution was presented to President Aquino. After her approval, it was submitted to the Filipino people for ratification through a nationwide plebiscite.
The Plebiscite Process
The plebiscite on the 1987 Philippine Constitution was held on February 2, 1987. The campaign period saw extensive public information drives and debates about the proposed charter. Despite some opposition and skepticism, the document was overwhelmingly ratified by more than three-fourths of the votes cast, a clear affirmation by the sovereign people of their desire for a return to democracy and their acceptance of the new constitutional framework. The high voter turnout and the landslide “yes” vote provided the new constitution with immense legitimacy.
Initial Challenges and Acceptance
The ratification of the 1987 Philippine Constitution marked the formal establishment of the Fifth Republic of the Philippines. The new government structure and legal framework began to take effect. While the constitution provided a strong foundation, its implementation faced initial challenges. The process of electing the new Congress and local officials took time, and the bureaucracy had to adapt to the new rules and procedures. Security threats and attempts to destabilize the government, including coup attempts, also tested the resilience of the nascent democratic institutions established by the constitution.
However, the widespread public acceptance of the constitution, demonstrated by the plebiscite results, provided the government with the necessary political capital to navigate these challenges. The charter became the supreme law of the land, guiding the actions of the government and the lives of the citizens, and serving as the basis for shaping Philippine law in the post-Marcos era.
The 1987 Constitution as a Foundation for Philippine Law
The 1987 Philippine Constitution is not merely a static document; it is a living instrument that serves as the fundamental basis for the entire Philippine legal system. All laws, executive actions, and judicial decisions must conform to its provisions.
Judicial Interpretation and Precedent
The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in interpreting the constitution and ensuring its supremacy. Through its power of judicial review, the Court has issued numerous landmark decisions that have shaped the understanding and application of the constitution’s provisions, particularly regarding the Bill of Rights, separation of powers, checks and balances, and social justice. These interpretations form part of the jurisprudence that guides lower courts and legal practitioners, continuously refining the framework for shaping Philippine law. Cases challenging the constitutionality of various government actions are regularly filed, highlighting the constitution’s role as the ultimate arbiter of legal disputes.
Legislative Framework and Statutory Development
The constitution provides the framework within which the Congress enacts laws. Every statute passed by the legislature must be consistent with the constitution. The extensive articles on the legislative department define its powers, composition, and procedures, ensuring that laws are made through a democratic and representative process. Furthermore, the constitution mandates Congress to pass specific laws to implement certain provisions, such as those concerning political dynasty and National Economy and Patrimony, demonstrating its role as the blueprint for future legislative action.
The constitution’s principles on human rights, social justice, and National Economy and Patrimony have inspired and guided the enactment of numerous laws aimed at protecting vulnerable sectors, promoting equitable development, and safeguarding national interests.
Legacy and Criticisms of the 1987 Constitution
The 1987 Philippine Constitution is widely credited with providing the stable legal and political framework that allowed the Philippines to consolidate its democratic gains after the Marcos dictatorship. Its emphasis on human rights, checks and balances, and separation of powers has been instrumental in preventing a return to authoritarian rule and fostering a more open political environment.
Successes in Democratic Consolidation
The constitution facilitated the restoration of democratic institutions, including a vibrant multi-party system, regular elections, and a free press. It empowered civil society organizations and provided avenues for citizen participation in governance. The strong Bill of Rights has been a vital tool for individuals and groups challenging government abuses and advocating for their rights. The independent Constitutional Commissions have played a significant role in promoting accountability and good governance. The principle of civilian supremacy has, for the most part, held firm, despite challenges. The charter successfully established the Fifth Republic on a foundation of democratic values.
Persistent Challenges (e.g., Political Dynasties, Social Justice Implementation)
Despite its successes, the 1987 Philippine Constitution is not without its critics. Some argue that certain provisions have proven difficult to implement effectively. The mandate to prohibit political dynasty, for instance, remains unfulfilled by Congress, contributing to the continued dominance of powerful families in politics. Similarly, while the constitution has strong provisions on social justice, the實現 of true social and economic equity remains a significant challenge, with poverty and inequality persisting.
Other criticisms include the perceived rigidity of the amendment process, which requires a three-fourths vote of all members of Congress or a constitutional convention, making it difficult to introduce necessary reforms. Debates about potential amendments, particularly concerning the form of government or economic provisions, resurface periodically.
Nonetheless, the 1987 Philippine Constitution stands as a landmark achievement in the nation’s history. It represents the collective will of the sovereign people to break free from authoritarianism and build a society based on freedom, democracy, and the rule of law. Its crafting was a pivotal moment in shaping Philippine law, shifting it away from a framework of control and towards one of empowerment and protection of individual and collective rights.
Comparing Constitutions: 1935, 1973, and 1987
Understanding the significance of the 1987 Philippine Constitution requires placing it in the context of its predecessors. The Philippines has had several constitutions throughout its history, but the post-war period is defined by three key charters, each reflecting the prevailing political climate and the nation’s evolving aspirations: the 1935 Constitution (Commonwealth and early Republic era), the 1973 Constitution (Martial Law era), and the 1987 Philippine Constitution (Post-EDSA Restoration).
Here is a more detailed comparison:
| Feature | 1935 Constitution | 1973 Constitution (as amended) | 1987 Constitution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Promulgation | Approved by US Congress, ratified by Philippine plebiscite | Drafted by a Convention under Martial Law, ratified controversially | Drafted by appointed Con-Com, overwhelmingly ratified by plebiscite |
| Legitimacy | High (product of Commonwealth period) | Contested (product of authoritarian regime) | High (product of post-dictatorship democratic will) |
| Form of Government | Presidential, unitary | Parliamentary (nominally), effectively authoritarian presidential | Presidential, unitary |
| Executive Head | President | Prime Minister (initially), then President (with expanded powers) | President |
| Legislature | Bicameral Congress (Senate and House) | Unicameral (Batasang Pambansa), Senate abolished initially | Bicameral Congress (Senate and House) |
| Judiciary | Supreme Court and lower courts | Supreme Court and lower courts, but subject to executive influence | Independent Supreme Court and lower courts, strong judicial review |
| Bill of Rights | Comprehensive, similar to US Bill of Rights | Suspended or curtailed under Martial Law | Expanded, stronger protections for individual liberties |
| Human Rights | Implicit in Bill of Rights | Systematically violated under the regime | Explicitly recognized and protected |
| Checks and Balances | Present, but executive power expanded during WWII Emergency | Weakened significantly, executive dominant | Strengthened significantly, robust inter-branch limitations |
| Sovereignty | Declared to reside in the people | Declared to reside in the people, but undermined by authoritarianism | Explicitly resides in the people, emphasized in preamble and articles |
| Martial Law | Presidential power to declare in case of invasion/rebellion | Used as basis for authoritarian rule, no strict limits | Stricter conditions for declaration (invasion/rebellion, public safety requires it), limited duration, reviewable by Supreme Court and Congress |
| Constitutional Commissions | None explicitly defined as independent | Some bodies created but lacked independence | COMELEC, CSC, COA (Independent, with specific powers and fiscal autonomy) |
| Social Justice | Basic provisions | Limited implementation, rhetoric used for control | Extensive provisions promoting equity and welfare |
| National Economy | Provisions on natural resources, public utilities | Used to justify state control and cronyism | Promotes Filipino control of economy and patrimony |
| Amendment Process | By Congress or Constitutional Convention | Easier for Marcos to introduce amendments | Requires 3/4 vote of Congress or Constitutional Convention |
Export to Sheets
This comparison underscores how the 1987 Philippine Constitution was a direct response to the failures and abuses of the Martial Law era, deliberately crafted to prevent their recurrence and build a more resilient democratic state rooted in the will of the sovereign people and committed to protecting human rights and promoting social justice. It serves as the enduring blueprint for shaping Philippine law in the democratic era.
Conclusion
The crafting of the 1987 Philippine Constitution was a pivotal moment in the nation’s history, representing a collective determination to break free from the chains of authoritarianism and build a future based on democratic values. Born from the ashes of the Marcos dictatorship and inspired by the spirit of the EDSA People Power Revolution, the Constitutional Commission diligently worked to create a charter that would embody the aspirations of the sovereign people.
This Post-Marcos Constitution meticulously re-established fundamental liberties through a strengthened Bill of Rights, instituted robust checks and balances and separation of powers to prevent the concentration of power, enshrined civilian supremacy over the military, and included comprehensive provisions on social justice and human rights. It restored a bicameral Congress and an independent judiciary with expanded powers of judicial review, essential safeguards for shaping Philippine law according to constitutional principles.
While challenges in fully implementing certain provisions persist, such as addressing political dynasty and achieving complete social justice, the 1987 Philippine Constitution has undeniably served as the bedrock of the Fifth Republic. It provided the necessary legal framework for the restoration of democracy and continues to be the supreme law guiding the nation’s governance, protecting the rights of its citizens, and influencing every facet of Philippine law. The process of its creation was a testament to the resilience of the Filipino people and their unwavering commitment to democratic ideals in the wake of a challenging historical period.
Key Takeaways:
- The 1987 Philippine Constitution was crafted after the fall of Ferdinand Marcos to restore democracy.
- It replaced the controversial 1973 Constitution, which facilitated authoritarian rule during Martial Law Philippines.
- The Constitutional Commission was appointed to draft the new charter, representing diverse sectors.
- Key features include a strengthened Bill of Rights, robust checks and balances, separation of powers, and emphasis on human rights and social justice.
- The constitution explicitly recognizes civilian supremacy and the sovereignty of the sovereign people.
- It was overwhelmingly ratified in a nationwide plebiscite in 1987.
- The charter serves as the fundamental basis for shaping Philippine law and institutions in the Fifth Republic.
- While successful in restoring democracy, challenges remain in implementing provisions like those addressing political dynasty.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ):
- Why was a new constitution needed after the EDSA Revolution? A new constitution was necessary because the 1973 Constitution was closely associated with the authoritarian rule of Ferdinand Marcos and did not embody the democratic principles for which the people fought in the EDSA People Power Revolution. It lacked legitimacy and contained provisions that concentrated power in the executive, undermining democratic values, checks and balances, and human rights.
- Who drafted the 1987 Philippine Constitution? The constitution was drafted by an appointed body called the Constitutional Commission (Con-Com), composed of 50 members representing various sectors and expertise, and chaired by Cecilia Muñoz-Palma.
- What are the key differences between the 1973 and 1987 Constitutions? Major differences include the form of government (effectively authoritarian presidential in 1973 vs. presidential with strong checks and balances in 1987), the legislature (unicameral/weakened in 1973 vs. restored bicameral in 1987), the judiciary (less independent in 1973 vs. highly independent with strong judicial review in 1987), and the Bill of Rights (curtailed in 1973 vs. expanded and strengthened in 1987). The 1987 Constitution also has explicit provisions on human rights, social justice, and independent Constitutional Commissions.
- What democratic values are emphasized in the 1987 Constitution? The 1987 Philippine Constitution strongly emphasizes democratic values such as the sovereignty of the sovereign people, human rights, rule of law, separation of powers, checks and balances, civilian supremacy, accountability, and transparency.
- How does the 1987 Constitution protect human rights? The constitution protects human rights primarily through its comprehensive and strengthened Bill of Rights (Article III), which guarantees fundamental civil and political liberties. It also has specific articles on social justice and human rights (Article XIII) and mandates the creation of the Commission on Human Rights.
- What is the significance of the Bill of Rights in the 1987 Constitution? The Bill of Rights is significant because it serves as a direct response to the abuses of Martial Law Philippines, providing robust legal safeguards against potential government overreach and protecting the fundamental freedoms of the Filipino people.
- Has the 1987 Philippine Constitution ever been amended? As of the current date, the 1987 Philippine Constitution has not undergone any formal amendments. There have been numerous proposals and attempts to amend it, but none have successfully gone through the full process required by the constitution itself.
- How does the constitution address the issue of political dynasties? Article II, Section 26 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution includes a provision stating that the State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service and prohibit political dynasty as may be defined and by law. However, the enabling law defining and prohibiting political dynasties has yet to be passed by Congress.
Sources:
- Bernas, Joaquin G. The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary. Rex Book Store, 2009. (A widely cited legal commentary by a member of the Constitutional Commission)
- Linde, Pasquale de. “The Making of the 1987 Philippine Constitution.” Philippine Law Journal, vol. 62, 1987, pp. 185-200. (An academic article discussing the drafting process)
- Aquino, Corazon C. “By the Sovereign Will of the People.” Speech delivered before the Constitutional Commission, June 2, 1986. (Primary source: Speech outlining the government’s expectations for the new constitution) – [Specific Link Not Available]
- The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. (Official text of the constitution) – https://www.google.com/search?q=https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/the-1987-constitution-of-the-republic-of-the-philippines/
- Rodis, Rodel P. “The 1987 Philippine Constitution: A Post-Marcos Charter.” Philippine Studies: Historical and Ethnographic Viewpoints, vol. 65, no. 2, 2017, pp. 205-236. (An academic analysis of the constitution’s historical context and impact)
- Abueva, Jose V. The Filipino Resurgence: A Revolution Without Arms. Center for Leadership, Citizenship and Democracy, University of the Philippines, 1992. (Provides context on the EDSA Revolution and the transition period) – [Specific Link Not Available]
- Cortes, Irene R. “The 1987 Constitution: From Consultation to Promulgation.” Philippine Law Journal, vol. 62, 1987, pp. 137-154. (Another academic perspective on the Con-Com process)