 |
| Spanish Mestizos (1846) by Jean Mallat de Bassilan |
FEUDAL PHILIPPINES
Right
Institutions, Wrong Leaders
By:
Joel Ruiz Butuyan - @inquirerdotnet
Philippine
Daily Inquirer / 05:10 AM December 18, 2017
When
the Duterte administration finally relinquishes power, a postmortem analysis of
its reign will reveal this major blunder: It failed to understand that the country’s
problems lie, not in our institutions, but in the leaders who misuse these
institutions.
This
foretelling of the future arises because President Duterte insists on pushing
for a shift to federalism, in advocating the abandonment of the lowest-bid
policy in government procurement, and in making it very easy for any president
henceforth to wield the fearsome powers of martial law.
It
took a mere half-day last week for the President to obtain an overwhelming
240-27 vote in congressional approval for a yearlong extension of martial law
in Mindanao, notwithstanding the government’s declaration of “total victory” in
Marawi City.
In
one fell swoop, the bitter lessons of martial rule under Ferdinand Marcos were
forgotten. With a muted whimper, the constitutional gains that were achieved
and that imposed strict requirements on any resort to martial law all came
tumbling down.
With
the ease by which martial law has been extended in Mindanao, despite the
complete cessation of hostilities in Marawi, what would now stop the President
from declaring martial law in the whole country on grounds that the New
People’s Army conducts military operations in many provinces nationwide?
The
Constitution sufficiently provides for a legislative veto against casual resort
to martial law, but this power is useless under a docile Congress. We have the
right institution but we have the wrong leaders.
The
President has also declared that he wants Congress to abolish the law requiring
government contracts to be awarded to the lowest bidder. The President
complains that this lowest-bid policy enables corrupt officials to manipulate
the bidding process. He says the correct policy should be for the government to
“buy the best” goods and services.
But
a policy to “buy the best” is not at all in conflict with a lowest-bid policy.
There’s only the need to ensure that the bid documents will clearly specify
superior quality, and that the lowest bid for such quality items will win the
bid.
The
reason that the government gets inferior-quality products under the lowest-bid
rule is this: Bidding officials rig the process. However, the same corrupt
officials will manipulate a “buy the best” bidding process. A “buy the best”
policy will be even more prone to corruption because such a standard is
subjective and debatable. We have the right institutional policy on public
bidding, but we have the wrong officials in charge of our bidding processes.
Finally,
the President insists on changing our unitary form of government to one that is
a federation of regions. The President complains that revenues and economic
growth are monopolized by imperial Manila, to the detriment of the provinces.
He also advocates federalism for Muslim Mindanao as a means of putting an end
to the Moro secessionist movement.
In
reality, many impoverished provinces are virtually subsidized by the national
government because the internal revenue allotments they receive are more than
their own revenue collections. What has been detrimental to the provinces is
the deeply entrenched corruption by local political dynasties. A shift to a
federal government will only further strengthen—politically and
economically—these dynasties which are the real curse of the provinces.
With
regard to Muslim Mindanao, there are the existing political structures and
bureaucratic institutions of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. The
President gets virtually anything he wants when he bamboozles and curses his
way. Why can’t he just crank up the ARMM by shaming and removing the corrupt
officials in its ranks, overhauling its agencies, infusing billions of pesos in
its programs, and supporting principled people who will succeed in its
leadership?
We
have the right institutions but we have the wrong leaders. Change our leaders,
not our institutions.
Comments
to fleamarketofideas@gmail.com
Filipinos
are very poorly prepared to build, defend, and practice democracy. Philippine
society has not yet crossed over into modernity. It is trapped in a sort of
pre-modern elitism, feudalism, and corruption. Filipinos are “liberals in law,
tribal in life.” (Raul Pangalangan)
Switching
to a federal or parliamentary structure promotes fiefdoms and secession, the
latter the very problem this radical constitutional change seeks to solve. A
federal or parliamentary structure will aggravate existing divisions based on
geography, language, history, and culture, sowing seeds of ethnic conflict. In
this respect, federalism will not inhibit the Bangsamoro secession but rather
incite it.
The
tendency of an archipelagic political group is to break up, e.g. ancient
Greece. Island groups disintegrate, politically. I wouldn't encourage this
tendency through a federal or parliamentary structure. We want to maintain
archipelagic integrity because in this dangerous world, size matters. We don’t
want to become smaller. Look at how weak Brunei is.
The
problem is not the existing political structure but rather it is how this
structure is being used by the elites. Federalism is a system that reinforces
the existence and use of private armies. It entrenches dynasties in power,
supports corruption, and co-opts plunder.
It
is not necessary to change the charter to reform massively corrupt political
dynasties and a weak political party system fatally crippled by endemic
turncoatism. They are the two principal defects bedeviling the Philippine
political system, undermining democracy and enabling plunder. The proper,
effective reforms can be enacted and implemented by the existing legislature
WITHOUT charter change.
Two
types of laws must be passed and implemented:
-
ANTI-DYNASTY LAW
We
need this law. We do not need more Ampatuan fiefdoms. An anti-dynasty law is
like antitrust regulation in the private sector. The anti-dynasty law seeks to
open public office to equal opportunity and to fair competition. A more
competitive political environment promotes products and services of better
quality (read: better government services) and lower prices (read: less
corruption).
-
ANTI-POLITICAL TURNCOATISM LAW
See,
for example:
Persons
and groups who are pushing for a federal or parliamentary structure are elites
who want to maintain their own fiefdoms and not subject themselves to term
limits in the legislature. They do not have the interest of the polity in mind.
Besides,
federalism is inconsistent with our long history so that the population is not
in fact clamoring for it. It is the politicians in power who are pushing the
federalism agenda.
Instituting
federalism to solve the Bangsamoro secession is needless and unwarranted.
Federalism for the sake of peace with one secessionist political group while
the rest of the country is largely content with one central unitary government,
is overkill. It is like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
The
Philippine people need to instill in themselves and in the coming generations
the values and principles of democracy. We need to strengthen and build
democratic institutions. Our advancement and economic development as a nation
depends on good governance and democracy. The peace and order, and development
problems of this nation will not be solved through the actions and policies of
a criminal, massively corrupt, fascist government.
Public domain image
ReplyDeleteImage link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Spanish_mestizo_costume.jpg
Gonzalinho
THE REALITIES THAT DEFINE OUR ELECTIONS
ReplyDeleteBy: Randy David - @inquirerdotnet Philippine Daily Inquirer / 05:10 AM October 14, 2018
Our political institutions are as modern in conception as they could possibly be. They were, after all, copied from the most advanced democratic system of our time — the United States of America. But, like almost all our borrowed institutions, our political system can only perform to the extent permitted by our society’s basic structure. That structure is highly hierarchical and essentially still segmented into families and tribalistic communities.
The sad reality of our time is that the prevailing social conditions of Philippine society cannot sustain the operation of its modern institutions. The evidence for this is all around us. Membership in our political parties means almost nothing. Our politicians feel neither shame nor awkwardness as they merrily move from one political party to another, depending on who is in power.
These so-called parties exert little effort in promoting the fundamental beliefs and vision of their organization. They admit members and field candidates with no regard for the seriousness of their commitment to party principles and objectives. Indeed, it is far more difficult to be admitted into a university student organization than to become a member of the average Filipino political party.
There are a few exceptions, of course. Akbayan Citizens’ Action Party, a party with very clear democratic socialist goals, is one. Formed as a party-list organization by an alliance of ideological social movements, it matured into a disciplined political party with a national presence. It managed to win seats in every party-list election, and, in 2016, succeeded in electing one of its young leaders, Risa Hontiveros, as senator.
Bayan Muna is another progressive leftwing political movement that registered and won seats as a party-list organization. Its representatives infused congressional deliberations with cogent views arising from a clear ideological perspective. Its success spawned the formation of likeminded parties representing the sectoral interests of marginalized groups.
Alas, it didn’t take long for traditional politicians to make a mockery of the party-list experiment by riding on the inclusive language of the law and creating their own party-list groups.
To be continued
THE REALITIES THAT DEFINE OUR ELECTIONS
ReplyDeleteBy: Randy David - @inquirerdotnet Philippine Daily Inquirer / 05:10 AM October 14, 2018
Continued
We are dealing here with the same problems that have bedeviled our politics for a long time. The most glaring of these is the mass poverty that afflicts our people, a condition that compels them to seek the patronage of those who have access to public services like healthcare, housing, and educational assistance. So long as elected politicians can claim a role in deciding who actually gets access to these services, so long will ordinary people see elections primarily as a quest for personal connections than as a contest of political visions.
Though we may think it perverse, there is actually some rationality at work here. We may think that the Filipino voters support the likes of Lito Lapid out of ignorance or out of a failure to distinguish between characters played in the movies and those played in real life. But, no, many vote for such candidates because they see them as approachable and compassionate protectors of the poor, so different from the ones with a pretense to high-mindedness and competence but keep their distance from the people.
Indeed, Filipino voters are not unaware that their compassionate patrons are often engaged in the shady business of enriching themselves at government expense. But, they quickly find excuses for this practice as long as their “idols” don’t do it brazenly (“hindi garapalan”), and are not perceived as taking for themselves much more than what they need (“moderated greed”). In our present scale of values, patronage morally trumps modern governance, making it extremely difficult for the Ombudsman to enforce the law against the high and mighty in government.
A modern party system cannot thrive in such environment. There is simply too much disparity in wealth and power between leaders and their followers. Ordinary members look to the party for their everyday material needs in exchange for continuing loyalty. Leaders end up financing the party they lead if only to keep it alive when it’s out of power.
Small wonder then that, in our system, political clans assume the function of grooming candidates that, in modern systems, belongs to political parties. It is foolish to expect that legislation alone can neutralize the monopoly of power by political families. They will always find ways of complying with the letter of the law while violating its spirit.
…This is clearly a part of our society’s wrenching transition to modernity. It is a process that can be completed only when the majority of our people achieve enough economic security to make them take their political rights seriously. That moment may not be as remote as we think it is. Akbayan’s Senator Hontiveros finally won after her third attempt, demonstrating that a constituency for democratic change is already growing in the womb of the old society.
public.lives@gmail.com
Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/116738/realities-define-elections#ixzz5WDV7cVkG
Gonzalinho