VOTE AGAINST THE BICAMERAL CONFERENCE REPORT
ON THE ABSENTEE VOTING BILL
By: JOKER P. ARROYO

        No one can argue agaist “a system for absentee voting by qualified Filipinos abroad” because the Constitution in these words so mandate it.

        But in doing so, Congress must adhere to what the Constitution requires. The Constitution says in clear positive language that “suffrage may be exercised by Filipinos xxx who shall have resided in the Philippines for at least one year and in the place wherein they propose to vote for at least six months immediately preceding the election.”

        Thus, Filipinos who are temporarily residing abroad such as OFWs and others who work, study, or visit, are qualified to vote as absentee voters because their stay abroad is temporary. In fact, they have homes here and their families are here.

        However, Filipinos who are permanent residents of a foreign country like green card holders in the United States cannot qualify as absentee voters. They have sworn under oath under the laws of their host country that they will permanently live in that country. Thus, they have homes and families there.

        Yet the Bicameral Conference Report would allow a permanent resident (e.g. green card holder) to vote if he executes an affidavit at the time he registers the he shall return to the Philippines and live permanently here within 3 years.

        A promise to return traduces the Constitution. Why? Because what is required of a voter is that he “shall have resided in the Philippines for at least one year immediately preceding the election.” In plain language, the voter must reside in the Philippines a year before the election, not after the election.

        The promise to live permanently underscores the fact that the voter is not an actual resident of the Philippines and therefore, ineligible to vote.

        Congress is duty bound to enact laws that are constitutional.

        For this reason, among others, I cast a negative vote.