WE CANNOT GIVE SOMETHING THAT IS PATENTLY

UNCONSTITUTIONAL
To all people present today, to our adjudicators and to our opponents, a
pleasant morning.The first negative speaker has proved that granting
emergency power to President Duterte is NOT necessary and NOT
beneficial, considering its redundancy thereby slowing more the process. I,
the second negative speaker shall argue why the resolution granting
emergency power is NOT practicable. My arguments are as follow:
The grant of this power is unconstitutional as it does NOT meet the
requirements of valid delegation of powers. It is unconstitutional by
being against the separation of powers. It is unconstitutional as it is
against the security of tenure expressly provided under SECTION 2
Paragraph 2 Article IXB of the Constitution.
Let me prove to you that emergency powers to be granted to President
Duterte is Unconstitutional. .First, the emergency power is a delegated
power from the Congress. Hence, this must conform to the requirement of
valid delegation of powers which are 1. There must be an emergency and
2. It must be specific. It was established to you that NO emergency
exists, this alone is sufficient to declare that the emergency power to
solve traffic jam is unconstitutional. .Another is that, it is not specific.
The bills filed before the Congress DO NOT specify which situations do
alternative modes of procurement applies.What particular point in Metro
Manila does it cover? What specific strategies are to be adopted? So, it is
too all encompassing without being specific. This made some Senators
doubtful the reason why Senate Resolution No. 59 was filed to inquire on
what does Duterte really want. Without being specific, we cannot grant
Duterte this power.
Onto my second argument it is unconstitutional for being in violation of
separation of powers. The emergency power prohibits lower courts to
issue Temporary Restraining Orders regarding projects subject to protests.
Let me emphasize that issuance of TRO is under the rules of court duly
promulgated by the Judiciary. In case of ECHAGARAY vs SECRETARY
of JUSTICE , it has been held that the Congress has no power to amend
Rules of Court..With the emergency prohibiting issuance of TRO, the
Congress illegally usurps the power exclusive to the Judiciary. .Only
the judiciary has the power to amend its own rules. This in all squares a
violation of separation of powers, engraved in the very constitution itself.
Lastly, its being against the security of tenure of government employees
granted by Section 2 , Paragraph 2 Article IXB of the 1987
Constitution. The proposed bill recognizes that government employees
can be terminated due to abolition and reorganization of offices.The law
only allows termination of employment only upon observance of due
process, which was not mentioned in the proposed bill. It need to be a
genius that this again a violation of the Constitution.

We do not say that emergency power per se is illegal. We only say that
the particular emergency power is unconstitutional. Ladies and
gentlemen, WE CANNOT BE RECKLESS. We cannot grant powers to a
specific person since it would contradict fundamental law of the
land.This makes the resolution NOT practicable because it is
UNCONSTITUTIONAL. With sufficient proof that the power is illegal WE, DO
NOT AFFIRM THE RESOLUTION of granting Duterte EMERGENCY POWERS
TO SOLVE THE TRAFFIC IN METRO MANILA.Thank you..I am now ready for
the affirmative's interpellation.