BY WENDELL VIGILIA

CAMARINES Sur Rep. Luis Villafuerte, proponent of the resolution calling for Congress to convene into a Constituent Assembly to propose amendments to the Constitution, on Monday night insisted that the House can go it alone without the Senate if it musters the constitutional requirement of three-fourths vote or 197 signatories of all 261 members of Congress which includes the 23 senators.

"It will require the participation of the Senate, if they are so willing to participate," Villafuerte told Rep. Roilo Golez (Ind., Parañaque) in a plenary debate.

Villafuerte is president of Kabalikat ng Malayang Pilipino (Kampi), the political party of President Arroyo.

"But what if they (senators) do not (agree to Con-Ass)?" Golez asked.

Villafuerte replied, "We should not impede the concept of three-fourths of all the members of Congress."

He anchored his arguments on his interpretation of the intent of Article XVII, Sec. 1 of the Constitution which provides that "any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution may be proposed by the Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members."

Villafuerte said he believes that so long as the constitutional requirement of three-fourths vote is met, it is enough to start the process of proposing amendments because the Constitution does not mention the words "House" and "Senate" and merely states "Congress."

"It is not the institutional representation that they make. It is as members of Congress, because in proposing amendments or revisions, the Senate and the House, as an institution, cannot act as members of Congress in that context," Villafuerte said.

He also admitted that his interpretation would be enough to force the Supreme Court to finally rule on the issue of whether Congress should vote jointly or separately in proposing amendments.

Villafuerte said the Constitution clearly delineates Congress’ legislative ordinary function from its power to amend or revise the Constitution and therefore, there is no need to seek the Senate’s concurrence if it does not want to participate.

"He is not talking of institutional participation. Are we here as individuals?" Golez said.

Villafuerte however said the framers of the 1987 Constitution adopted a procedure which "conforms to a unicameral system but adopted in a bicameral system."

"If the framers of the present Constitution wanted to perpetuate the provision of the 1935 Constitution, why did they not do so? Why did they delete the phrase ‘Congress in joint session assembled’ and delete the phrase ‘voting separately’? They did that out of what?

Honest mistake? They did that out of oversight?" he said.

Golez, spokesman for the minority, said that by forcing his issue, Villafuerte was offering a "very creative interpretation of the Constitution."

"That to me is quite shocking," he said. "Because when we speak of constitutional change by Congress, we are talking of institutional intervention, not individual intervention."

Rep. Antonio Cuenco (Lakas, Cebu) said it would be best for the House to sit down with senators to discuss convening a Constitutional Convention because the Upper House has declared its openness to it.

"We’re banging our heads to the wall," he told the committee on constitutional amendments. "If we have our own way, our own separate way, we’ll get nowhere."

The committee, chaired by Rep. Victor Ortega (Kampi, La Union), has already decided to suspend deliberations on Speaker Prospero Nograles House Resolution 737 which seeks to allow foreigners and foreign corporations and associations to own land.