Congress has far more important workthan impeachment

First of two parts

CONGRESS has managed to convince itself that the nation’s most urgent business is the
political fate of Vice President Sara Duterte, in the service of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s
overarching agenda since he came to power: Stop Sara from leading the nation by 2028.
Yet if one looks at the legislative agenda that Congress and Marcos themselves have officially
agreed upon, the contrast is almost embarrassing. There is a long queue of laws affecting
electricity bills, food prices, classrooms, corruption, political dynasties, land use, water, bank
secrecy, government budgeting and the structure of our elections. Many have been waiting not
for months but for decades.
I am not arguing that Congress may simply ignore an impeachment case properly presented
before it. The Constitution assigns to the House the power to impeach and the Senate the duty to
try a valid impeachment. But constitutional duty does not require the political class to behave as
though an impeachment trial was the country’s central national project. The real cost is not
merely the number of hours senators sit as judges. It is the enormous political bandwidth, media
attention and legislative energy consumed by a proceeding whose most obvious consequence is
to determine who may or may not be a presidential candidate in 2028.

The irony is that Malacañang and Congress have already written the alternative agenda
themselves. As of Aug. 6, the Legislative-Executive Development Advisory Council (Ledac) listed
33 priority measures for passage, plus another large group of bills listed as Common Legislative
Agenda. These include an anti-political dynasty law, freedom of information, bank secrecy
legislation reform, a new Philippine Budgeting Code, Epira (Electric Power Industry Reform
Act) amendments, system-loss abolition, stronger electricity regulation, classroom construction,
nutrition, rice policy, MSME (micro, small and medium enterprise) reform and amendments to
the National Building Code. The list reads almost like an indictment of what Congress has failed
to do while political warfare occupies center stage.

Consider the most scandalous example: the anti-political dynasty law. The 1987 Constitution
ordered the state to prohibit political dynasties “as may be defined by law.” Congress has refused
to enact that law for nearly four decades. Only this year did the House finally approve House Bill
8389 and transmit it to the Senate. House leaders themselves have called it a constitutional
mandate “40 years in the making.”
There is something almost comical in senators and representatives solemnly invoking
constitutional principles in impeachment while Congress has ignored for 39 years one of the
Constitution’s clearest political-reform commands. If legislators want to demonstrate devotion
to constitutional democracy, passing a genuine anti-dynasty law would be a far more convincing
act than another season of televised speeches.

Then there is freedom of information. The Constitution has recognized the people’s right to
information on matters of public concern since 1987. Congress came tantalizingly close to
passing a Freedom of Information (FOI) law in 2010, which however died on the final session
day for lack of a House quorum. Sixteen years later, the House has again passed an FOI measure
and sent it to the Senate.
Corruption
If legislators really want to expose corruption, why not give every Filipino a stronger legal right
to obtain government records instead of depending on whichever congressional committee
happens to be investigating a political enemy?
The National Land Use Act is another monument to legislative paralysis. The Philippine
Institute for Development Studies has described the effort to enact such a law as “almost three
decades old.” Congress has repeatedly passed various versions, only to watch them die before
final enactment. The current House has again approved a National Land Use bill and sent it to
the Senate.
This is not an abstract planning exercise. Every year, the country quarrels over whether land
should be used for agriculture, housing, factories, mining, tourism, forests or infrastructure.
Flooding worsens because development ignores watersheds and natural drainage. Upper-class
residential projects have displaced farmland, as has happened at such a dizzying pace in Santa
Rosa, Laguna. Local zoning conflicts with national priorities. For nearly 30 years, Congress has
known that the country needs a coherent land-use framework. Yet here we are again.
Political-party reform is even older than many young voters. The proposed Political Party
Development Act was first drafted in 2002 and endorsed by the major political parties. Its
purpose was to attack personality-based politics, patronage and opaque campaign finance by
building real parties around programs and ideology. Twenty-four years later, our “parties” still
behave largely as temporary vehicles for politicians. Representatives switch alliances after
elections with barely a blush, and presidential coalitions disintegrate as soon as succession
becomes contentious.
A Whistleblower Protection Act has likewise been knocking around Congress since at least 2004,
when the late senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago filed a bill establishing a whistleblower bill of
rights. Twenty-two years later, Filipinos who expose large-scale corruption still cannot rely on
the kind of comprehensive protection found in better-governed systems. Congress loves
whistleblowers when their testimony hurts an adversary; it has been much less enthusiastic
about creating a durable system protecting whistleblowers, whoever happens to be in power.
Electricity
Electricity should be another congressional obsession. Epira is now 25 years old. The country
was promised competition and lower prices. Instead, the Philippines continues to struggle with
expensive power. Ledac itself now lists Epira amendments, abolition of system loss charges,
strengthening of the Energy Regulatory Commission and a Sariling Kuryente Act among the
legislative priorities. These are measures that can affect every household and every factory every
month. A Senate that wants to demonstrate relevance could spend weeks asking why Filipinos

still pay so much for electricity rather than months deciding which dynasty gains advantage in
2028. Have we as a nation decided that a monopoly controlled by an Indonesian magnate
should continue amassing billions of pesos in profits?
Water is just as basic. A bill seeking to create a Department of Water Resources has repeatedly
surfaced because responsibility for water is scattered among numerous agencies. Floods
devastate cities during the rainy season while parts of the country face water shortages during
dry months. Metro Manila periodically fears another supply crisis. Agriculture suffers from
inadequate irrigation. Yet an integrated water-governance law remains unfinished business.
There are more. Party-list reform is needed because a mechanism supposedly designed to
broaden representation has been captured in many cases by established political interests.
Campaign-finance reform is overdue in a country where candidates spend amounts that bear
little relation to legal salaries. The Local Government Code needs serious updating after more
than three decades of decentralization. The Fisheries Code needs reform while food security and
fisherfolk poverty remain chronic problems. The Coconut Farmers and Industry Trust Fund
needs strengthening so that assets accumulated in farmers’ names actually transform coconut
agriculture.
These measures are on the official Ledac Common Legislative Agenda agreed upon by the
executive and the congressional leadership themselves. Malacañang says they are important.
The Senate says they are important. The House says they are important. Yet Congress has bowed
to Marcos, saying that these should be put on hold until Sara Duterte is stopped from becoming
president in 2028. If Sara, as Marcos believes, is an existential threat to him and his clan, he
doesn’t have the right to involve the Congress in his fight.
Combat
Congress was not created for political combat, despite Marcos’ obsession to take out Sara.
The opportunity cost of impeachment therefore deserves to be stated plainly. Every week that
the political system obsesses over whether Sara Duterte can remain vice president is another
week in which laws affecting 115 million Filipinos receive less attention.
The comparison becomes devastating when measured in years. Anti-dynasty: nearly 40 years.
National land use: nearly 30. Political-party development: 24. Whistleblower protection: 22.
Freedom of Information: at least 16 years since it almost became law. Epira reform: a quarter-
century after the electricity experiment began.
These are not obscure legislative housekeeping items. They concern why our politics is
dominated by families, why corruption is hard to uncover, why land development is chaotic, why
parties have no principles, why whistleblowers are vulnerable, why power is expensive and why
trillions in public money can move through a system the ordinary taxpayer barely understands.
Congress does not have unlimited legislative capacity. A three-year Congress produces only
around 100 genuinely national laws, while dozens of major reforms compete for its limited
session days. An impeachment trial consuming weeks or months of Senate attention therefore
has a measurable legislative cost.

---

If senators want a historic legacy, they already have the legislation waiting for them. Congress
should not spend its time destroying a political career for the sake of the Marcos camp, which
cannot accept Sara’s ascending to power in 2028.
On Friday: Sheer arithmetic reveals how useless the trial is.
Facebook: Rigoberto Tiglao
X: @bobitiglao
Website: www.rigobertotiglao.com

The post Congress has far more important workthan impeachment first appeared on Rigoberto Tiglao.

Congress has far more important workthan impeachment
Source: Breaking News PH