The possible impossibility of meaningful constitutional reform

Editorial by: Ramon Miguel Cristobal

“No advance in wealth, no softening of manners, no reform or revolution has ever brought
human equality a millimeter nearer” - George Orwell

35 years have passed since the 1987 constitution was put into practice. For better
or for worse, the birth of the 1987 constitution marked the end of the Marcos administration and
completely changed the form by which Philippine politics operates. The 1987 constitution was
created to replace a fundamentally flawed system of laws that allowed for its exploitation and to
prevent the repetition of our motherland’s darkest days. 35 years have indeed passed, but did the
1987 constitution truly fulfill its purpose? Did the 1987 constitution succeed in promoting a just
and humane society, promoting the common good, and securing democracy and independence
under a regime of truth and equality? The dire conditions of the Filipino people hint that our
current constitution has failed. However, while it would not be a mistake to blame the system
and the constitution that maintains it, we have to ask the question of whether or not it is even
possible for meaningful constitutional reform. The Center for Local and Constitutional Reform
(CLCR) has spearheaded the government’s attempt to initiate a redo of our current constitution
to promote individual regional capital development and independence. Senate hearings led by
late Senator Robinhood Padilla have been taking steps towards the creation of an updated
constitution, a constitution designed to suit the needs and material conditions of contemporary
Philippine society; and experts have been called to give their guidance and insights on the
development of a truly genuine and meaningful constitutional reform. While the efforts made by
the CLCR and the Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes
suggest that progress is being made in the fight for the promises made in our current
constitution’s preamble, some questions need to be addressed. Is there a way to change the
system when the stakeholders who have held power for the longest time call the shots? Is it
possible to make a meaningful change in the system, when the people who have the power to
make any meaningful changes have no reason to change the system that fits them so well? Is
there a way to break the possible impossibility of meaningful constitutional reform? Perhaps the
answer doesn’t matter at all. Despite the negative implications for the future of our motherland,
this should not stop us from trying to improve the lives of the Filipino people.