At last, the proverbial cat is out of the bag. Now, it can be told openly and conclusively. It is devious but ingenious. It does not really care how many people are displaced and impoverished or how many individuals are hurt or killed.
Charter Change: this is the ultimate target, the primary objective of Malacañang.
This explains the why the infamous “deal,” “agreement”—or whatever it is eventually called—cannot be reasonably explained, much less made really understandable without Charter Change. This covert accord has been uncovered, more so the certain provisions that are not only untenable but also unbelievable if the Philippine Constitution would not be changed.
It would not matter at all it the said avidly desires and assiduously designed Charter Change (CHA-CHA) were done through a Constituent Assembly (CON-ASS) or a Constitutional Convention (CON-CON). The priority concern and pursuant compelling Malacañang agenda once again all lead to a constitutional change (CON-CHA).
But more than just accommodating the said secretive consensus, there is something much more deviate and sinister in the CHA-CHA about which Malacañang has been long since salivating. In other words, any constitutional change done in anyway and anyhow before May 2010, is primarily geared at extending the reign of the present national leadership.
Either CON-ASS or CON-CON is not only acceptable but also very promising as far as Malacañang is concerned. In the event of a CON-ASS, the ruling administration has a good number of well established allies in the present Congress. In the case of CON-CON, the same reigning Malacañang occupant also has a big number of obedient subjects in the persons of many provincial, city and municipal lead public officials. The key Malacañang preoccupation wherefore is having a CHA-CHA approved in principle – and everything else follows as a matter of course.
Once the needed change in the Fundamental Law of the land supposedly to accommodate the “Piece of Paper” is on deck, then there is no plausible reason why another constitutional amendment could not be also readily proposed—such as changing the form of government to Federalism, Unicameral or anything at all, on condition only that Malacañang tenure of power is extended.
Is it true that someone has already acquired the addition to power?
By the way, the inherent nature and immediate implications of addiction to power are barred for its indefinite extension. This is especially true when the power is intimately accompanied with immunity from suit, not to mention the encompassing privilege to secrecy, not even to think of the national wealth at its complete disposal.
More than any other known addiction, somebody addicted to power would leave no stone unturned, would spare no one and nothing, would continue holding on to it as long as possible and through any conceivable means. What is proper or gross, reasonable or indecent—all these do not really matter in the case of addiction to power.
August 13, 2008