Constituent Assembly or Constitutional Convention?

[Sovabon]

---

If we want change, we must start by educating our people, enlightening them

Samot ka dugay! It is easy to say than doing it! Best thing is the conduction of the Snap Election!

[giver_bert]

sir, i was able to see the 1st Mindanao Political Leaders Summit aired over NBN few Sundays ago, there was a politician (i forgot the name) endorsing the Constituent Assembly if ever there will be a charter change. he himself was a delegate to the Constitutional Convention. he was endorsing Con Ass, because aside from its being easy and unexpensive, according to him, it would be difficult to put a time frame in a Constitutional Convention. in fact, should Marcos hadnt declared Martial Law, dili jud kuno to mahuman ang ConCon. tinoud ni?

it is indeed very true that the method of changing the charter via a constituent assembly is the cheapest, most efficient way of getting constitutional reform done.. but at the same time terrifying, when one realizes that a constituent assembly means trusting senators and congressmen to act on our behalf when they amend our constitution...

[giver_bert]

personally, i prefer a constitutional convention.. by constitutional convention, composed of delegates elected by their fellow citizens, provides a forum for an intelligent discussion, profound study, and dispassionate debate on the proposed remedies to perceived Charter defects.. although whether we like it or not, whether the charter is going to be amended through a constituent assembly or a constitutional convention, the advocates of personal security and political survival might influence the outcome of the convention.. ( i hope i'm wrong with this )

constitutional amendments should not be guided by expediency.. we are where we are not because of defects in our constitution but because of the stupidity, corruption and failed policies of those who are entrusted with it.. changing our constitution does not address the question of what got us here in the first place..

Â*