By Dr. Bernardo Villegas, member of the Philippine Constitutional Commission
Within the next six year, it is highly probable that the Philippine Constitution of 1987 will be amended most probably through a Constitutional Assembly rather than a Constitutional Convention which President Duterte and his advisers consider too costly. Although the Duterte Administration will focus on such amendments as changing the form of government from unitary to federal parliamentary and removing the restrictions against Foreign Direct Investments, it is possible that some members of Congress who will constitute the Con-Ass may be tempted to propose other amendments to any another provision or provisions. As one of the members of the Constitutional Commission appointed by former President Cory Aquino to draft the Philippine Constitution that was ratified in 1987, I would like to strongly suggest that there be provisions in the present Constitution that should not be touched and should be considered literally sacred. Actually, one of the reasons I am happy that the present leadership decided to go the Con-Ass route is that there will be more reason to focus on a few amendments for speed and expediency rather than to completely revamp the entire Philippine Constitution of 1987, which will be too time consuming and may actually jeopardise the ratification of the revised Constitution by the Filipino people.
As a member of the Philippine Commission
appointed by former President Cory Aquino, I spent most of my time crafting with my Committee on the National
Economy, of which I was Chairman, the provisions referring to the Philippine
economy. My most important contribution
to the entire Constitution, however, was
to give my wholehearted support to the late Justice Cecilia Munoz Palma,
President of the Constitutional Commission, who championed all the provisions
regarding marriage and the family, as the most basic foundation of Philippine
society. Those of us who literally
defended these provisions with our lives just wanted to be true to the words of
the very Preamble of the Constitution which starts with “We, the sovereign Filipino people, imploring
the aid of Almighty God, in order to build a just and humane society…” We considered it impossible to build a “just
and humane society” without founding it on the Filipino family and on marriage
as an “inviolable social institution”, which in turn is the foundation of
the family (see Section 1 of Article XV
of the 1987 Philippine Constitution).
The
whole of Article XV should remain intact, especially those referring to the
duties of the State to defend:
-The
right of spouses to found a family in accordance with their religious
convictions and the demands of responsible parenthood.
-The
right of children to assistance, including proper care and nutrition, and
special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and
other conditions
prejudicial to their integral human
development.
-The
right of the family to a family living wage and income; and
-The
right of family and family associations to participate in the planning and
implementation of policies and programs that affect them. This provision should especially
apply to the primary role of parents as the
first educators of their children.
Considering
the increasing tendency of developed societies to consign the elderly to very
impersonalised institutions for the aged, we should make sure we retain Section
4 of
Article XV which states that “the family has the duty to
care for its elderly members…” without denying that the State has also the
obligation to care for the elderly through just programs of social security.
Even
more untouchable are those provisions under the Declaration of
Principles and State Policies (Article II) which refer to the family. Among these is Section 12 which states
that “the State recognises the sanctity
of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic
autonomous social institution. It shall
equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from
conception. The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of
the youth for civic efficiency and development of moral character shall receive
the support of the Government.” As I
have pointed out in many occasions in support of legislation, “conception” here
was defined by the majority of the members of the Constitutional Commission as
the “fertilisation of the ovum” and not implantation. This should help the Philippines to retain
the honour of being one of the last countries in the world to criminalise the
killing of unborn babies, the worst manifestation of the culture of death. Unborn babies are the most defenceless among
human beings.
The
inviolability of marriage is directly related to the provision of Section 13 of
Article II which states that “the State recognises the vital role of the youth
in nation-building and shall promote and protect their physical, moral,
spiritual, intellectual, and social well-being.
It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism, and
encourage their involvement in public and civic affairs.” Myriad of studies of social sciences all over
the world present evidence linking marriage to an impressive array of positive
outcomes for children. Both social and
biological mechanisms seem to account for the value of an intact marriage in
children’s lives. From a sociological
perspective, marriage allows families to benefit from shared labor within the
household, income streams from two parents, and the economic resources of two
sets of kin. A married mother and father
typically invest more time, affection, and oversight into parenting than does a
single parent; as importantly, they tend to monitor and improve the parenting
of one another, augmenting one another’s strengths, balancing one another’s
weaknesses, and reducing the risk that a child will be abused or neglected by
an exhausted or angry parent. The trust
and commitment associated with marriage also give a man and a woman a sense
that they have a future together, as well as a future with their children. This horizon of commitment, in turn,
motivates them to invest practically, emotionally, and financially at higher
levels in their children than cohabiting or single parents. These findings are summarised in a
publication entitled “Marriage and the Public Good” (The Witherspoon Institute,
Princeton, New Jersey). For comments.,
my email address is bernardo.villegas@uap.asia
Well said, Doctor. I look forward to the effects of your cause, especially in several of my students who are victims of abusive marriage. I hope that there shall be a way to separate them from their abusive partners (some of whom married and simply disappeared) while still being able to find love in more suitable people.
ReplyDelete