!"#$%&' )*+ ,'#-.

-/ ,"*- 0%1-*2
3+ 4"/2*
1he Lamblno group gaLhered 6.3 mllllon slgnaLures for Lhelr peLlLlon Lo make changes Lo Lhe 1987
hlllpplne ConsLlLuLlon Lhrough people's lnlLlaLlve. 1he proposal, whlch was noL aLLached Lo Lhe
slgnaLure sheeLs, would make changes Lo ArLlcles vl and vll of Lhe ConsLlLuLlon, changlng Lhe sysLem of
governmenL from resldenLlal-8lcameral Lo arllamenLary-unlcameral, and also adds ArLlcle xvlll,
whose SecLlon 4 mandaLes LhaL afLer Lhe proposed changes are raLlfled, Lhe arllamenL convene wlLhln
forLy days afLer such raLlflcaLlon Lo propose amendmenLs Lo, or revlslons of, Lhe ConsLlLuLlon conslsLenL
wlLh Lhe prlnclples of local auLonomy, decenLrallzaLlon, and sLrong bureaucracy.
1he Lablno group flled Lhe peLlLlon wlLh Lhe Comelec for raLlflcaLlon under SecLlon 3(b) and (c) of 8A
7633. 1he Comelec dlsmlssed Lhe peLlLlon because of lack of enabllng law governlng ConsLlLuLlonal
amendmenL Lhrough people's lnlLlaLlve, 8A 6733 ls lnadequaLe Lo lmplemenL SecLlon 2 of ArLlcle xvll of
Lhe ConsLlLuLlon, accordlng Lo Lhe rullng ln SanLlago vs. Comelec.

33+ 3**5-*
A. WheLher Lhe Lamblno group's peLlLlon ls a revlslon or amendmenL.
8. WheLher Lhe Lamblno group's peLlLlon complled wlLh ConsLlLuLlonal requlremenLs for people's
lnlLlaLlve.
C. WheLher Lhe Comelec commlLLed abuse of dlscreLlon ln dlsmlsslng Lhe Lamblno group's peLlLlon.
333+ 6-.7
A. 1he Lamblno group's peLlLlon ls a revlslon.
1o undersLand why, here are several crlLerla for Lhe deLermlnaLlon of wheLher a peLlLlon ls a revlslon or
an amendmenL.
a. 8evlslon broadly lmplles a change LhaL alLers a baslc prlnclple ln Lhe ConsLlLuLlon such as Lhe
prlnclple of separaLlon of powers or sysLem of checks and balances.
b. 8evlslon ls a change LhaL alLers Lhe subsLanLlal enLlreLy of Lhe ConsLlLuLlon, affecLlng
subsLanLlal provlslons.
c. AmendmenL refers Lo change LhaL adds, reduces, or deleLes wlLhouL alLerlng prlnclple
lnvolved.
d. AmendmenL lmplles addlLlon as wlll affecL an lmprovemenL or beLLer carry ouL Lhe purpose
for whlch Lhe ConsLlLuLlon was framed.
e. Callfornla's quanLlLaLlve rule: 1here ls revlslon when change ls so exLenslve as Lo change
dlrecLly Lhe subsLanLlal enLlreLy of Lhe ConsLlLuLlon.
f. Callfornla's quallLaLlve rule: 8evlslon when change accompllshes such far reachlng changes
ln Lhe naLure of our baslc governmenLal plan, whlch lncludes change ln fundamenLal
framework and powers of Lhe branches of governmenL.
1he Lamblno group's peLlLlon saLlsfles boLh LesLs-lL overhauls ArLlcles vl and vll, whlch lnclude 130
provlslons, and lL changes Lhe fundamenLal framework and powers of governmenL branches, merglng
execuLlve and leglslaLlve powers ln one branch.
Change from havlng Lhree branches Lo Lwo consLlLuLe alLeraLlon of Lhe prlnclple of separaLlon of powers,
as Lhe leglslaLlve and execuLlve powers are merged. 1here ls also a change ln Lhe prlnclple of checks and
balances. lor example, under Lhe presldenLlal sysLem, Lhe Lhree branches acL as checks upon each, buL
under Lhe parllamenLary sysLem, Lhere ls no check beLween leglslaLure and execuLlve for Lhey are
merged.
Pavlng a unlcameral leglslaLure ls a change ln Lhe prlnclple of checks and balances. 1he SenaLe and Lhe
Pouse of 8epresenLaLlves acL as checks on each oLher under Lhe blcameral sysLem, buL under Lhe
unlcameral sysLem, such check does noL exlsL.
8. 1he Lamblno group's peLlLlon does noL comply wlLh Lhe ConsLlLuLlon requlremenLs for people's
lnlLlaLlve.
1o undersLand why, here are Lhe requlremenLs:
a. eople's lnlLlaLlve can be used only for amendmenLs.
b. 8equlslLe for lnlLlaLlve are: Lhe peLlLlon ls auLhored and slgned by Lhe people (noL Lhelr agenLs or
represenLaLlves), and Lhe proposal musL be parL of peLlLlon, or aLLached Lo lL, wlLh menLlon of
such aLLachmenL. 1he reason for 8 ls LhaL Lhe proposal musL be seen by Lhe people before
slgnlng Lo prevenL decepLlon and fraud, and Lhe peLlLlon cannoL be a dlrecL peLlLlon (as
conLemplaLed by Lhe consLlLuLlon) lf Lhe people do noL see Lhe proposal before slgnlng.
c. lL ls Lhe lnLenLlon of Lhe wrlLers of Lhe consLlLuLlon on lnlLlaLlve, whlch ls copled from Lhe uS, Lo
use [urlsprudence on lL. Accordlng Lo [urlsprudence, and even 8A 7633, logrolllng-Lhe lncluslon
of more Lhan one lssue ln a peLlLlon-ls prohlblLed. Logrolllng puLs Lhe people ln a dllemma, as
Lhey can only say yes or no Lo an enLlre proposal, Lhough one lssue may be unaccepLable Lo
Lhem.
1he Lamblno group's peLlLlon, Lhus, vlolaLes ConsLlLuLlonal requlremenLs because lL ls a revlslon. 1he
orlglnal and revlsed proposals were noL aLLached Lo Lhe peLlLlon before Lhe people slgned. 1he addlLlon
of ArLlcle xvlll consLlLuLes logrolllng, as lL ls enLlrely a dlfferenL lssue from Lhe proposed change ln form
of governmenL.
C. Comelec dld noL commlL grave abuse of dlscreLlon, for lL merely followed Lhe CourL's rullng ln
SanLlago vs. Comelec.

0%1-*2 '& 8-9":"2- ;9%&%'&* <":2 =
>?8@3,A <BCDBC3EBC F,;C,?GG3CDH
A. WheLher Lhe Comelec commlLLed grave abuse of dlscreLlon.
a. no, as lL only acLed ln accord wlLh CourL's rullng ln SanLlago vs. Comelec.
b. ulsmlssal ls Lhe only course of acLlon avallable, oLherwlse, lL would have commlLLed deflance of CourL.
>?8@3,A <?C; F0388AC@3CDH
A. WheLher Lamblno and AumenLado have auLhorlLy Lo flle Lhe peLlLlon and Lo flle peLlLlon for cerLorlarl
and mandamus.
a. ?es. Wordlng of Lhe slgnaLure sheeL ls Lhls: My slgnaLure hereln. slgnlfles my supporL for flllng
Lhereof (referrlng Lo Lhe peLlLlon). (Iost my commeot. eveo lf tbls wotJloq coooot be coosttoeJ os oo
ootbotlzotloo, tbe foct tbot tbe people JlJ oot object to lombloo ooJ AomeotoJos fllloq coo be
coosttoeJ os coosttoctlve ootbotlzotloo.)
c. under SecLlons 1 and 3 of 8ule 63 of Lhe 19978ules of Clvll rocedure, when a Lrlbunal, board, or
offlcer of [udlclal or quasl-[udlclal funcLlon acLed ln excess or wlLhouL [urlsdlcLlon, or wlLh grave abuse of
dlscreLlon, an aggrleved parLy may flle for cerLorlarl, when Lhere ls no appeal, or plaln, speedy, and
adequaLe remedy ln ordlnary course of law. When a Lrlbunal, corporaLlon, board, offlcer, or person
unlawfully neglecLs performance of acL en[olned by law, an aggrleved parLy may flle for cerLorlarl or
mandamus before approprlaLe courL, when Lhere ls no appeal, or plaln, speedy, and adequaLe remedy ln
ordlnary course of law. Clearly, Lamblno and AumenLado are aggrleved parLles.
8. WheLher 8A 6733 ls sufflclenL buL lnadequaLe Lo lmplemenL Lhe ConsLlLuLlonal provlslon for people's
lnlLlaLlve.
a. lL ls sufflclenL and adequaLe.
b. 1he law's fallure Lo suggesL Lhe lnlLlaLlve, and Lo provlde for peLlLlon conLenLs, and for subLlLle on
people's lnlLlaLlve on consLlLuLlonal amendmenLs are weak reasons Lo declare lL lnadequaLe, because
Lhey are mere deLalls and noL fundamenLal pollcles, and lL was Lhe lnLenLlon of Lhe leglslaLors Lo glve
effecL Lo Lhe consLlLuLlonal provlslon.
c. Comelec under SecLlon 2(1) ArLlcle lx-C of Lhe ConsLlLuLlon ls granLed Lhe power Lo enforce and
admlnlsLer all laws and regulaLlons on lnlLlaLlve, and CourLs have long recognlzed lLs rule-maklng power.
(Iost my commeot. uoes ooyooe koow of ooy cose wbete tbe cootts tecoqolzeJ socb tole-mokloq
powet?)
C. WheLher Lhe Lamblno group's peLlLlon ls a revlslon or amendmenL.
a. 1he quanLlLaLlve LesL falls. Whlle Lhe peLlLlon changes 130 provlslons, Lhe facL ls LhaL only Lwo of Lhe
elghLeen arLlcles of Lhe ConsLlLuLlon are Lo be changed.
b. 1he quallLaLlve LesL falls Loo. A good consLlLuLlon should have Lhree provlslons: consLlLuLlon of llberLy,
consLlLuLlon of governmenL, and consLlLuLlon of soverelgnLy. Cnly Lhe consLlLuLlon of governmenL ls
changed, and lL doesn'L change Lhe naLure of Lhe hlllpplne sLaLe, whlch ls democraLlc and republlcan.
c. 1hough Lhe LesLs form parL of [urlsprudence on Lhe provlslons from whlch Lhe hlllpplne provlslon for
people's lnlLlaLlve was copled, Lhey cannoL be applled because Lhey were only Lhe oplnlons by some
members of Lhe convenLlon. 1he lnLenL of Lhe wrlLers of Lhe consLlLuLlon ls noL whaL Lhe courLs wanL Lo
brlng forLh when [udglng lssues of consLlLuLlonallLy, buL Lhe lnLenL of Lhe people. (Iost my commeot. lt
moy be otqoeJ tbot sloce tbe wtltets wete tbe tepteseototlve of tbe people, tbey tepteseot tbe loteot of
tbe people.)
d. !usL because a change ls subsLanLlal lL does noL mean LhaL lL ls a revlslon. Slnce Lhe forelgn
[urlsprudence can'L be used as argumenL, Lhere ls a need Lo go back Lo Lhe baslc deflnlLlon of
amendmenL and revlslon. AmendmenL ls a change, wheLher subsLanLlal or slmple. 8evlslon lmplles
change of Lhe whole documenL, whlch may lnclude new covenanL.
e. LlmlLlng lnlLlaLlve Lo slmple amendmenLs ls ln lLself a vlolaLlon of Lhe people's soverelgnLy, whlch ls
enshrlned ln Lhe ConsLlLuLlon.
u. WheLher Comelec commlLLed grave abuse of declslon/
a. ?es. 1he Commlsslon should have glven due process Lo Lhe peLlLlon, because SanLlago vs. Comelec
cannoL glve precedence. Whlle orlglnally, Lhe was a ma[orlLy supporLlng Lhe declslon LhaL 8A 6733 ls
sufflclenL buL lnadequaLe, when Lhe moLlon for reconslderaLlon was flled, Lhere was an equal dlvlslon,
and lL has been courL pracLlce LhaL when Lhere ls an equal dlvlslon, Lhe declslon of Lhe lower courLs or
Lhe prevlous declslon ls upheld, buL lL ls only LreaLed as res [udlcaLa and noL sLare declsls.
>?8@3,A I?38?JE3CD
a. Comelec should allow due course for Lhe Lamblno group's peLlLlon, because lL ls Lhe soverelgn rlghL of
Lhe people Lo propose amendmenLs (Culsumblng follows uno's argumenLs on revlslon vs.
amendmenL.)