DUTERTE VS. DUTERTE

By Bayawanon

A revolution is an attempt to overthrow a government if the revolution would be successful, the victors then could establish a REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT.

President Duterte is proposing a Revolutionary Government, this government cannot come into being without a revolution, now because the president is proposing a revolutionary government, does it mean to say that he must stage a revolution against the duly constituted authority of the Philippines which he heads? The answer must be in the affirmative for Duterte to establish a revolutionary government he must stage a revolution first.

But can he stage a revolution against a duly elected government which he heads? The answer must be in the negative, for how can a duly elected supreme national leader rebel against himself?

I can still vividly recall the lecture of former Justice Secretary Sedfrey Ordonez more than twenty years ago, where he stressed that a Revolutionary Government can only be established after a successful revolution has overthrown a de jure or even a de facto government. Now, how can President Duterte establish a Revolutionary Government without a revolution?

Can President Rodrigo Roa Duterte establish ipso facto a government which cannot be found in the Constitution? The answer would be a very BIG NO, and because of this, it seems like Duterte is again contradicting himself by proposing a form of government which is unconstitutional.

NEMO DAT QUOD NON-HABET "One cannot give what it does not have", the Philippine Constitution does not give anyone the power to establish a revolutionary government for the plain and simple reason that the same constitution does not provide for it. In connection to this, the President must stop talking about this Revolutionary Government in order for him to stop confusing the public, otherwise, it's gonna be him against himself.