A Federal Republic with a parliamentary government

At present the debate on constitutional reform has been centered on federalism. Not much is being said about what advocates should be its rightful partner – a parliamentary system with a federalist structure.

That was what the Constitutional Commission during former President Gloria Arroyo’s time concentrated on – a campaign on the shift from our presidential government to a parliamentary system. Federalism was discussed but not on its own. The members believed that the two go together if we are to achieve government reforms that would push the country forward.

Like the Athenians who wanted more people to be active in politics for good government, that is also what Filipinos want. More so because our present leader, President Rodrigo Roa Duterte had pushed for it in his campaign. Like the crowds that accompanied him to victory, they too wanted inclusion.

In my opinion we must come as close as we can to narrow the gap between experts living in an academic world and the general public wanting good government as it affects their daily lives.

One suggestion that came up in discussions of 2005 Constitutional Commission is to admit members of the public from different sectors in the first phase of discussion. Unfortunately, in the present discussion, the public was not present. In my case, I read about it in newspapers. I think that is also the same with the million crowd in Duterte’s miting de avance. Maybe I live in a dream world but other countries like Iceland did it the other way around. The Icelanders themselves promoted the reforms as it relates to their daily life. In the first discussion, the handicapped was included as a sector. But we are so mired in the old way of doing things that “inclusion” of the crowd will not happen.

The model for BayanKo’s crowdsourcing came from Iceland. Discussions began with ordinary people sitting around bonfires to keep themselves warm while they spoke their heart and mind out. I was aware that it was not possible for Filipinos being in the millions and mostly politically illiterate to do the same. We relied on technology. It may not be all Filipinos but discussions could take place in the internet which is visited by at least a third of the population. That plus the personality of Duterte who was able to connect with the crowds by using their language (including familiar expletives) made way for the making of a people-oriented constitutional reform.

If we follow the old way of amending without providing for the people’s participation it will exclude the majority. If we really want change we cannot rely on the legislative branch of government whether as a constituent assembly or a constitutional convention. It is the problem.

In the first place, the structure of government with senators acting like 24 presidents needs to be changed. We should have driven this fact that we cannot get things done quickly enough because of the gridlock between the executive and the legislative. The senators are elected at large with no particular constituencies to govern. Our government is not structure for a stable and good governance. We developed money-oriented politics with deep set corruption pervading in all walks of life.

Gave birth to corruption because of the need for money with millions of voters for a president. Do you wonder that we now have Smartmatic-machines to decide who should be elected?

It comes from the American colonial legacy that made possible to continue their hold on the country through the oligarchy. Here are excerpts from the Draft for a federal Republic for the Philippines edited by Jose Abueva of which I was a member.

“The evils that developed from the presidential system come from this defect. This exclusion of the many became worse with time. In my opinion, is only one of the two vitally needed structural and institutional changes in our traditional form of government. The other is the shift from our highly centralized and obsolete Unitary System that treats the local governments and communities as dependent colonies of the national government to a modern, functional, decentralized Federal System.

Without this even more important constitutional reform, the political leaders in the new Parliamentary System will happily continue to exercise and enjoy the centralized governmental power of the old unitary system as their imperial prerogative and monopoly. With this undue advantage, they will perpetuate their traditional centralized control and domination over the powers, authority and resources of the National Government at the expense of our weak and dependent local governments and communities.

The Unitary System is certain to perpetuate the stagnation of our economy and society, the impoverishment of many of our people who live in the countryside, and our backwardness in relation to our neighbors in Asia.

The proposed Federal Republic or Federal System is based on the so-called principle of dual sovereignty. According to this the CMFP Draft Constitution provides that governmental powers shall be distributed and shared between the Federal Government (National Government) and the States (Regional Governments) and their local governments.

More specifically, a Federal Republic will build a just and enduring framework for peace through unity in our ethnic, religious, and cultural diversity, especially in relation to Bangsa Moro or Muslim Filipinos. Responsive Federalism will accommodate their legitimate interests, end the war in Mindanao, and discourage secessionism.

Federalism will empower our citizens by enabling them to raise their standard of living and enhance their political awareness, participation and efficacy in elections and the making of important government decisions. Governance will be improved and corruption will be reduced by the new division of powers and functions between the Federal Government and the States, and by the transparency of governance and its accessibility to the people in the regions, cities, provinces, and municipalities.

Federalism will improve governance by empowering and challenging State and local leaders and entrepreneurs around the country. It will release them from the present stifling central government control and regulation. It will compel them to assume greater responsibility for leadership and delivery of services and business, and reduce their dependence on the national government. As the people will be more involved in government decisions, they will demand superior performance and public accountability of their political leaders and officials. At the same time, the people will be more willing to pay taxes that will finance government programs and services for their direct benefit.”