By
Jose V. Abueva
Chairman of the Consultative Commission
President of Kalayaan College and U.P. Professor Emeritus
of Political Science and Public Administration
I. The Philippines today. What
is the big picture?
-
We are a weak, divided nation.
Most people are preoccupied with their concerns for self
and family, private interests and possessions. They do
not care about other citizens, the community, the nation,
the government, the state, the environment, and the common
good.
-
Our Republic is still a “Soft State.”
Weak rule of law and governance because of the dominance
and power of political families, warlords and rebel groups.
-
Our constitutional democracy cannot deliver on its promise
of a peaceful, just and humane society under the rule
of law.
-
Our people are increasingly dissatisfied with the way
our democracy works, but still believe in democracy as
an ideal.
-
In fact, our country is in a deep political and economic
crisis. The very survival of our constitutional democracy
is gravely threatened.
In our deepening political division and confrontations,
some groups are proposing undemocratic and extra-constitutional
means of resolving our differences, including rebellion
and military intervention.
II.
Our democratic political development
since independence in 1946
- We
had a Presidential and Unitary Government under the 1935
Constitution—until Sept. 1972 (except during the
Japanese Military Occupation 1942-1945).
Legislative power in the unicameral National Assembly,
then in Congress (Senate and House of Representatives).
Executive power in the President. Judicial power in the
Supreme Court and lower courts. Based on the principle
of “separation of powers and checks and balance”
among the three branches of government.
-
The Marcos Authoritarian Government lasted from Sept.
1972 to Feb. 1986. We had a Pseudo-Parliamentary, and
actual Dictatorship under the 1973 Constitution.
President Marcos exercised executive and legislative powers
in a pseudo parliamentary government, and controlled the
judiciary and the media. He governed with the military
and national police. The people lost their political freedom
and civil rights. Many were illegally detained, tortured,
killed, or simply disappeared.
- The
EDSA Revolution ended the Marcos Dictatorship on Feb.
25, 1986. It called for “Justice, Freedom and Democracy.”
The world’s freedom-loving nations acclaimed our
success in overthrowing a dictator of over 13 years without
bloodshed—through “people power.”
-
President Aquino ruled for one year under a Revolutionary
Government—from Feb. 25, 1986 to Feb. 1, 1987, under
her so-called “Freedom Constitution.”
- Democracy
was restored under the 1987 Constitution prepared by an
appointed Constitutional Commission and ratified by the
people on Feb. 2, 1987. We also restored a Presidential
and Unitary Government.
We restored the separation of powers and checks and balance
among the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary.
The unitary structure concentrated powers and revenues
in the national government. Local governments are weak
and dependent on the national government but some local
autonomy was extended under the Constitution and the Local
Autonomy Code.
-
Under President Aquino (1986-1992) we restored our elitist
democracy and restarted our economic recovery, but there
were nine coup attempts by politicized military rebels
supported by some Marcos loyalists.
-
Under President Ramos (1992-1998) our economic recovery
made solid progress as he was also able to restrain the
military rebels, and successfully end the GRP-MNLF conflict.
But, as before and after Ramos, our chronic social and
economic problems and the Communist and Moro insurgencies
persisted.
-
In January 2001, President Estrada was the second president
removed by “people power,” after his failed
impeachment trial for plunder and corruption. His removal,
trial and detention led to more political instability.
This showed the people’s determination to hold their
President accountable. This was followed in May by a march
on Malacañang by thousands of his urban poor supporters,
suggesting a “revolt of the poor constituents”
of an ineffective democracy.
-
Vice-President Arroyo succeeded Estrada and was elected
in 2004 to a full six-year term until 2010. President
Arroyo has worked hard to improve social services, infrastructure,
and initiate economic reforms—with some success.
But her term has been marred by sustained opposition by
Estrada loyalists and other opposition and NGO leaders
and military rebels, and unresolved allegations of cheating
in the 2004 presidential elections where she defeated
FPJ, “Da king” of Filipino movies. She has
survived several “people power” protests,
military rebellion, and impeachment attempts but suffers
from unending challenges to her legitimacy.
-
After 19 years under our restored elitist democracy and
our presidential and unitary government—we have
failed to check our problems of mass poverty, unemployment,
social injustice, corruption, rebellion, inadequate education,
health, housing, rapid population growth, destruction
of the environment, and so on.
Every year so many of our people have to go abroad to
find jobs and support their families.
- Largely
because our leaders are unwilling and unable to raise
taxes, our government has very limited funding. It is
now heavily in debt from too much borrowing. Up to 40
% of our national budget goes to debt service, thus reducing
funds for social services and development.
However, serious fiscal reforms and new taxes have been
initiated by President Arroyo with the support of Congress.
III.
Charter change is imperative and urgent!
Fully
realizing the serious ineffectiveness of our political institutions
and governance, and the failure of our constitutional democracy,
many leaders and citizens are proposing their reform by
revising our Constitution and other ways.
President Arroyo and many leaders in the House of Representatives
and the local governments and civil society are proposing
the change of our political system—
-
From a presidential government to a parliamentary government.
-
From a bicameral legislature to a unicameral Parliament.
-
From a centralized unitary system to a decentralized system
of autonomous territories and regions leading to a Federal
Republic.
- It
is also proposed to reform of our political parties as
institutions of representation, and our electoral system,
judiciary, and civil service.
-
And it is proposed to liberalize some restrictive economic
policies in the Constitution—to attract much more
foreign investments and business, as our progressive neighbors
in Asia have been doing all along.
IV.
What Parliamentary Government is proposed ?
-
A Parliament that combines legislative and executive powers.
- Unicameral
in structure.
- The
Parliament shall have as many members as may be provided
by law. To begin with, the Parliament shall have as many
elected members as the present 235 congressional district
representatives.
- In
addition the members chosen by the political parties shall
constitute thirty percent of the total members of Parliament
(MPs), including those elected to the Parliament.
These additional members are chosen by “proportional
representation” of the political parties based on
their share of the total votes cast nationwide for the
individual parties in the previous parliamentary election.
- “Checks
and balance” are exercised in the relations between
the majority party and the opposition parties, including
their regular “question hour.”
- The
opposition is represented in the Commission on Appointments.
There are also the others centers of countervailing power:
the business groups, the interest groups, the media, and
civil society organizations.
- Members
of Parliament shall be elected, or chosen by the political
parties, for a term of five years, with no term limits.
Candidates for MP must have a college degree.
- The
Prime Minister is elected by a majority of all the MPs.
He exercises the executive power as the Head of Government.
He is normally the leader of the majority party in the
Parliament.
- As
the Head of the Government, the Prime Minister is assisted
by the Cabinet of Ministers, at least three-fourths of
whom are MPs.
- From
among the MPs, the Parliament elects the President who
is the Head of State for a term of five years.
The President shall cease to be an MP and a member of
any political party. He has a term of five years.
V.
Advantages of Parliamentary Government over our Presidential
Government?
- Because
Parliament exercises both legislative power and executive
power, it will ensure the coordinated, efficient and effective
making of laws and policies and their implementation.
Especially because the Parliament has only one house or
chamber.
-
The Prime Minister and the Government (the Cabinet and
governing party headed by the Prime Minister) assume collective
responsibility and collective accountability for governance
to the Parliament and the people.
The people will know whom to reward for good governance
and administration, or to punish for failure and corruption.
-
Parliamentary Government is more likely to ensure the
election of the Head of Government—the Prime Minister—for
his leadership and experience in the party and in the
public service. He is known to party members.
- It
will help prevent election of the Head of Government on
the basis largely of, personal popularity or “win-ability,”
not on proven competence and experience as a political
leader.
-
It will be easier to change the Head of Government and
the ruling party whenever it becomes necessary, by a vote
of no confidence in Parliament, and its dissolution, followed
by a new election of MPs.
No need for impeachment, people power revolts, and military
intervention that cause political instability, disrupt
the economy, discourage foreign investors, and hurt the
people, especially the poor.
-
Unlike in our Presidential Government where the President
is both Head of Government and Head of State, the function
of Head of State is assigned to a ceremonial President
elected by the Parliament. This will lighten the burden
on the Prime Minister who can concentrate on governance.
- At
the same time the President, who symbolizes the people’s
sovereignty and national unity, can be a rallying point
as a leader who is above partisan politics.
- Parliamentary
Government and electoral reform will empower the people
to choose not only the candidates for the Parliament but
also the political party they want to govern the country
and the regional and local governments.
-
It will develop a two-party system and political parties
that are democratic, disciplined, united, and effective
in making and carrying out a program of government that
can secure popular support.
Unlike our present political parties that are undemocratic,
opportunistic, oriented to personalities and patronage,
and not to policy and program of government.
- The
people elect the members of Parliament among candidates
in parliamentary districts and also by “proportional
representation” of the rival political parties in
the parliamentary election (a new party list of all political
parties).
- Parliamentary
elections will cost much less than nationwide presidential
and senatorial elections that require billions and corrupt
the political system.
- It
will be easier and faster and less costly to administer
elections and proclaim the winning candidates.
-
It will reduce the high cost of electing the Head of Government
in a national election by choosing the leader of the majority
party (or coalition) in Parliament as Prime Minister.
- The
selection of additional members of Parliament through
“proportional representation” of the political
parties will enable the leading political party to select
other competent leaders to serve in Parliament and the
Cabinet.
These are professionals, business leaders, scholars, and
representatives of various sectors of society who can
serve in Parliament and the Cabinet, although they are
not willing to run for member of Parliament.
- Parliamentary
Government can lead to more continuity in policy and administration
if the majority party or coalition governs well and the
people are satisfied, because the people will learn to
reward or punish the ruling party for its success or failure
in governance.
The people will know that the ruling party, not just individual
leaders, are the ones responsible and accountable for
the government’s performance.
VI.
In Conclusion
Most
stable and progressive countries in the world have a parliamentary
government. These include Japan, Canada, Australia, United
Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Spain, Norway, Sweden, and also
India, Singapore, and Malaysia in Asia.
-
Parliamentary government will help us to have good governance:
ang mabuti at mabisang pamamalakad ng ating gobyerno at
bayan.
- Charter
change to a parliamentary government, along with decentralization
and devolution of powers to the regional and local governments
in a federal structure, will enable us to respond more
efficiently and effectively to our problems, meet our
challenges and achieve our goals as a nation, and compete
in the global economy.
- Charter
change to a parliamentary government and a decentralized
structure will help us to mobilize and sustain “people
power” in national, regional and local governance
to reduce poverty and corruption.
-
It will empower us to achieve the peace, prosperity, justice
and security we all want for ourselves and our children.
- Moreover,
with less restrictions on foreign investments and participation,
the Government will be better able to help in attracting
these investments that will create more jobs, raise incomes,
provide better education, health, welfare, and security
to our people.
- And
we can build and maintain more schools, hospitals, waterworks,
roads, bridges, seaports and airports.
-
With a great deal of political will, hard work and sacrifice
we can build a nation worthy of our heroes, a country
fit for our children—of which Filipinos can be really
proud.
|