There was an EDSA I and an EDSA II. Some say there was an “EDSA Tres”, although Pres. Arroyo mentioned that “the world will not forgive an EDSA 3″. Some say that the real People Power happened in EDSA I, and that EDSA II was a far cry from its predecessor. However, let’s not go into that debate now, and instead focus on the legal distinction between People Power I and II.
According to the Supreme Court, EDSA I involves the “exercise of the people power of revolution which overthrew the whole government”. The Aquino government was the result of a successful revolution (although a peaceful one) by the sovereign people. No less than the Freedom Constitution (Proclamation No. 3) declared that the Aquino government was installed through a direct exercise of the power of the Filipino people “in defiance of the provisions of the 1973 Constitution, as amended.” EDSA I is extra-constitutional.

On the other hand, EDSA II is an “exercise of people power of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly to petition the government for redress of grievances which only affected the office of the President.” Estrada resigned and, pursuant to the 1987 Constitution, Vice-President Arroyo succeeded as President. Hence, the Arroyo government (the first one) is not revolutionary in character. EDSA II is intra-constitutional.

Now, could we consider EDSA II as an exercise of People Power in the same spirit as EDSA I? What about EDSA Tres? This is were the debate starts. You tell me.

Related posts: