The Inevitable Push: Why Constitutional Change is Highly Probable Under Bongbong Marcos Jr.

The specter of constitutional change, or "Cha-cha," looms large over the Philippines, and while President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr. publicly frames it as an economic imperative, a deeper dive into the nation's political history and current dynamics reveals a "great possibility" that his administration will indeed move towards its agreement, with potential implications for presidential term limits.

Historically, constitutional amendments in the Philippines have often been intertwined with the consolidation or extension of political power. The most striking example remains the 1973 Constitution, enacted during his father Ferdinand Marcos Sr.'s martial law era. This dramatically reshaped the government, effectively prolonging the elder Marcos's rule. The subsequent 1987 Constitution, forged in the aftermath of the People Power Revolution, was a direct response to this authoritarian past, imposing strict term limits—including a single six-year term for the president—as a safeguard against future dictatorships. Specifically, Article VII, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution states that "The President shall not be eligible for any re-election." This historical context is crucial because it fuels public suspicion surrounding any present-day Cha-cha initiatives.

Despite President Marcos Jr.'s insistence that his focus is purely on economic provisions to attract foreign investment and modernize the economy, the very act of opening the constitution for revision revives fears of political maneuvering. He has articulated that the 1987 Constitution was "not written for a globalized world" and that economic adjustments are necessary for the Philippines to become "globally competitive."

However, several factors point to a high probability of this constitutional change coming to fruition:

Presidential Endorsement: Unlike past attempts at constitutional reform that faced lukewarm or even opposition from sitting presidents, Marcos Jr. has openly declared his support for amending the economic provisions. He explicitly stated in February 2024 that "this administration’s position in introducing reforms to our constitution extends to economic matters alone... Nothing more." This presidential backing provides significant momentum and direction for the initiative.

Congressional Alignment: The current political landscape sees a strong alliance between the President and key figures in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Senate Resolution of Both Houses No. 6 and House Resolution of Both Houses No. 7 have already been filed, mirroring each other's intent to amend specific economic provisions. These resolutions propose inserting the phrase "unless otherwise provided by law" into certain articles, such as those governing public utilities (Article XII), education (Article XIV), and advertising (Article XVI), which would empower Congress to lift or relax current economic restrictions. This legislative synchronization indicates a concerted effort to push Cha-cha forward.

Strategic Timing and Mechanism: The discussion around holding a plebiscite for these amendments concurrently with the 2025 national and local elections presents a pragmatic approach to economize on resources. While proponents frame it as efficiency, it also means the public will be voting on constitutional changes amidst the frenzy of electoral campaigns, potentially diluting focus on the intricacies of the proposed amendments.

The "Trojan Horse" Concern: Regardless of the President's stated intentions, the historical precedent creates an environment where any constitutional revision is viewed through the lens of potential political implications. The argument that economic changes are a precursor to later political amendments, including term limits, is a persistent concern raised by various groups, including former President Rodrigo Duterte. While Marcos Jr. has stated that political changes can come later, and that he is unwilling to change land ownership for foreigners, this does not fully assuage fears of future political amendments.

The "What if" Scenario: The very act of opening the constitution for specific economic amendments creates a pathway for other changes to be introduced. While the current focus is economic, the mechanism for amendment (be it a Constituent Assembly or Constitutional Convention) inherently carries the risk, or opportunity depending on one's perspective, for a broader scope of revisions to be considered.

In conclusion, while President Marcos Jr. maintains that the push for constitutional change is driven by a genuine desire for economic progress, the confluence of historical patterns, strong presidential and legislative backing, and strategic timing makes it highly probable that his administration will agree to and vigorously pursue these amendments. The ongoing debate, fueled by historical context and political maneuvering, suggests that while the initial focus might be economic, the long-term implications, particularly concerning term limits, will remain a central and contentious aspect of this constitutional journey.