Desired Activity:

Activity No. 01: Essay

Instruction: Answer the following exhaustively.
1. What is the relevance of a Constitution in a country?
The Constitution is important because it protects individual freedom,
and its fundamental principles govern the United States.
The Constitution places the government's power in the hands of the citizens.
It limits the power of the government and establishes a system of checks and
balances.

The primary function of a constitution is to lay out the basic structure of the
government according to which the people are to be governed. It is the
constitution of a country, which establishes the three main organs of the
government, namely, the legislature, executive and judiciary.
The constitution of a country not only defines the powers allotted to each of
the three main organs, but it also significantly makes a clear demarcation of
the responsibilities assigned to each of them. It effectively regulates the
relationship between these organs as well as the relationship between the
government and its people.
Since the country’s constitution stands superior to all the laws framed within
the territorial precincts of the country, any law enacted by the ruling
government has to be in conformity with the concerned constitution. As such,
the citizens would, in turn, be abiding by not just the law, but also working
in sync with the demarcations of the constitution laid by the country.
The constitution does not simply provide a recipe for an efficient government,
but also deals with limitations on power. Since power corrupts and absolute
power corrupts absolutely, a constitution is established to restrict the abuse
of power by those who conduct governmental functions.
The constitution of a particular country lays down the national goals which
form the basic edifice on which the nation rests upon. For instance, the
constitution of India has inscribed in it the primary facets of the nation which
are democracy, socialism, secularism and national integration.
A constitution, besides thrusting on the rights of the citizens of the concerned
nation, also has embedded in it the duties that the citizens require to adhere
to as well.

2. Do you think there is need to change the existing constitution?

We do not need to change the existing constitution we have in our country.
The Philippines has the best constitution. In fact, the constitution we have gives
solely the power to its people. It is the only constitution which gives power to the
people to choose who would be their servant. It is the welfare of the people that it
protects. The current Constitution of the Philippines gives power to the voice of
the people. It is the only constitution that recognizes the voice of the people as
the supreme law. People have the freedom to elect and remove leaders. In this
constitution the People is the master and the Leaders are the servants. It gives
equal rights to innocents and the suspect during trials. Both can have their own
lawyer, if not afford the government can provide one. In court you are given the
chance to prove your innocence.

React: Does killing ex-soldier Winston Ragos an act of violation of Article

3 Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution? Why? (Refer to news last April 23,
Shooting of an ex-soldier due to violation of ECQ)
The killing of ex-soldier Winston Ragos created a huge buzz about the
human right that were claimed to be violated. Article III SECTION 1. No person
shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall
any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. The reported act of killing
has divided the opinion of the netizens as well as the whole country. To be sure
let’s look the both parties. The reason why did the policeman shoot the ex-soldier
and what did the ex-soldier does to trigger the policeman. According to the
report, the victim, on April 21, Ragos, who was suffering from post-traumatic
stress disorder (PTSD), was shot dead by Police Master Sergeant Daniel Florendo
near a quarantine checkpoint in Barangay Pasong Putik in Fairview, Quezon
City. Police earlier said Ragos refused to follow Florendo despite the latter's
repeated warnings, prompting the cop to shoot him. Authorities also claimed that
Ragos posed a threat because he was armed with a caliber .38 revolver; but the
family denied that the former soldier possessed a firearm.
To me, Dura lex, sed lex. “The law may be harsh, but it is the law.”
Principle of the Rule of Law. Going out even if they were asked to stay at home
because of the lockdown is breaking the Republic Act 11332. The ex-soldier
shows that he possesses threat to the front liners. As a trained individual, the
police will surely shoot him because of the threat he is carrying to the innocent
people around the checkpoint and the front liners. Though, the family of the
victims claimed that the victim is not carrying any weapon, the fact that it
threatens the police is a violation. His Article III section I is not violated. He was
being asked to surrender to the authorities, the police talk to him, but he chooses
not to. Still, even at his death he was being investigated to give the proper and
fair justice and judgment to the both parties, that is why his Article III, Section I
was not violtated.