The Constitution and Local Autonomy Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno (ret.) I wish to start with a reminder from Aldous Huxley: “Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.” Hence, let us start with facts, facts that cannot be ignored because they have been our bedfellows for so long a time and with little prospect that they will leave us. Foremost of these is the fact that we have always been ruled by a few, the oligarchy of the privileged, albeit with changing faces and varying powers. Even in pre Spanish times, the Philippines was ruled by a select few. The areas of the archipelago dominated by the Muslims were ran by sultans who ruled with semi-divine powers. The non-Muslim areas were organized as barangays and governed by rajahs and datus vested with the trinity power… the power to make law, power to interpret the law and power to execute the law. The Spaniards came and colonized the country for 300 years, with the sword on one hand and the Cross on the other. The rulers had different faces. They had also a different garment. Some were garbed in the habiliments of King and Queen and ruled as royalties wielding the power of life and death. The others were garbed in the clothes of the clergy, with the more dreadful power to condemn people to burn in hell. This joint oligarchy of the blue blood and the demigods established a semi-feudal economy in the country. Then came the Americans, representing another type of oligarchic rule. They came not garbed as kings or queens, neither as clerics with a halo around their heads. They came in business suit, after buying us from the Spaniards for $20 million in a fire sale. They came preaching but preaching another gospel, the gospel of prosperity according to Adam Smith. They swore from a different Bible, the book entitled “Wealth of the Nations” by Adam Smith. They proclaimed an invisible god, but it is the “invisible hand” of the free market of capitalism. The Americans had a new way of perpetuating their imperial interest. First, they did not disturb our iniquitous economic structure as they recognized and preserved the property rights of the existing Philippine elite pursuant to the Treaty of Paris. Second, they raised and nurtured the political leaders who will govern the Philippines and echo to the core their ideology. The Americanization of the Filipino was carried out, fast and efficiently. The school curriculum was changed to reflect American values and culture. Bright Filipino students were sent to American Universities as pensionados and then embedded in policy making positions in government after their return to the Philippines. The bureaucracy was filled up with people who had a blind faith in the infallibility of democracy and capitalism. Third, elections were held but insured that there would be a government run by brown Americans. Among others, the right to vote was limited only to those who own property and restricted to those who speak and write in English or Spanish. The rules disenfranchised the masses. Only the elites could elect and they elected themselves to power. Thereafter, we were granted our “independence.” We promulgated the 1935 Constitution that had to be approved by the President of the US before it could take effect. Thus was born democracy in the Philippines, a democracy midwifed by the American authorities, a democracy made in the United States. We adopted a republican democracy with an American flavor. The economy was capitalistic, based on free enterprise, a belief on free trade, but Americans were given parity rights in the exploitation of our natural resources, tariff concessions and military bases privileges. After the Americans, came us and it was our turn to govern ourselves. We elected a succession of leaders decidedly pro-American. Hardly economically sovereign, we continued to suffer from unequal economic arrangements in favor of the US which disabled the nation from becoming industrialized. Its failure to industrialize, its role as exporter of valueless products and dumping ground of foreign finished goods led to its economic stagnancy. But it was the era of the Cold War, where the struggle between the US and Russia for world dominion bred dictators of different colors. Dictators sprouted in Asia, Africa, Latin, South and Central Americas and were tolerated by both the US and Russia provided they can be relied upon as allies in their ideological struggle. A beneficiary of the ambiance, was President Marcos who squelched the restlessness of the people by declaring martial law and thereafter, by establishing an authoritarian government. In 1972, a new Constitution was promulgated that was hardly democratic for it conferred both executive and legislative powers to the sitting President. In 1986, the EDSA People Power revolution ended his regime. It was one glorious moment for Filipinos who proved to the world the validity of the adage “people power is greater than people in power.” President Corazon Aquino was installed to the Presidency directly by people power. She appointed a Constitutional Commission that drafted the 1987 Constitution and which forthwith was approved by the people. However, the people power euphoria proved to be momentary. The ugly reality soon set in and revealed that President Marcos and his cronies had left the nation economically impoverished, buried under a debris of foreign and domestic debt. The era also saw the collapse of Russia and the end of the Cold War. A new world came into being, a world believing in globalization as an absolute truth. Its economic mantra was deregulation, privatization. Its flag was carried by the US and faithfully, we followed the globalization flag thru a succession of Presidents: Fidel Ramos, Joseph Estrada, and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. I will not tarry with the highlights and lowlights of their government for they belong to recent memory. After 3 centuries of the Spaniards, half a century of American colonization and years and years of governing ourselves, we should ask ourselves these questions: (a) Has the presidential, democratic form of government worked for the people; (b) has the system of separation of powers and checks and balances given us a government that is efficient, accountable and transparent; (c) has a centralized government resulted in the neglect of our local governments? and (d) has not our system of government bred a political and economic elite that continuously monopolize power and impoverish the people? Let me start with the problem which seriously bedevils our democracy today: the exclusivity of the elite that continuously governs our people. To my mind, the exclusivity of this elite is a key reason for our status as a second rate democracy. Reliable statistics say that only 100 political families rule the Philippines, a country of 92 million people. Democracy has been defined in various ways but certainly, it has never been understood as a government by the few. I respectfully submit that a government by the few will ineluctably lead to a government for the few. This was well discussed by publisher Mr. Tony Lopez in a column entitled “Why only 100 out of 17 million families control Philippine politics and economy” which appeared in the Manila Times issue of July 2, 2012. He wrote and I quote: x x x There has been unprecedented income inequality. Out of 17 million (yes, million) families, only 100 families rule this country’s politics and economy. In 50 years, seven presidents came from just four families – two Macapagals, two Aquinos, two cousins (Ferdinand Marcos and Fidel Ramos), and an actor (Joseph Estrada who now has built his own dynasty in San Juan and in Congress). In 1987-1992 Senate, four Senators lived in one subdivision in Quezon City. No single senator represented Mindanao, the country’s food and mining bowl and home to the two longest-running rebellions in the world. You can count in your fingers the number of Filipino dollar billionaires (10). Only one of them is brown. There are 36 commercial banks. But only four groups or families control more than 66 percent of the P7-trillion resources of the entire commercial banking system – Henry Sy Sr. 19.51 percent, Zobel-Ayala 11.94 percent, the government 14 percent, and Lucio Tan 7.27 percent. Only ten families own 60 percent of the P10-trillion combined market capitalization of more than 200 listed companies. I maintain that a government of the few, for the few and by the few will result in the poverty of the many and the oppression of the multitude. The tragedy is, under our present constitution , this sad state of affairs has little chance of ending. There will be no end to its endlessness because our elections are tilted in favor of the rich. The poor cannot win an election in our country even as a dog catcher. The wealthy political dynasties now reigning in our land can never be dislodged by the money-less masses. We need a constitutional change to level the playing field. But let me warn that blocking the ingress to power by the masses to preserve its monopoly by the few will cause the slow death of democracy. To be sure, democracy is not the rule of the few even if it is not the mob rule of the many. There is no democracy if the few who are up will always be up in the totem pole of power, in defiance of the law of gravity. Nor is there democracy by requiring the poor to walk on the water before they can levitate to the top of society. Democracy can only survive if they who govern represent the synthesis of interests of all classes of society. My second thesis for your consideration is that we can never unlock the potential of our people unless we grant our local governments genuine autonomy thru constitutional change. I say genuine autonomy because the kind of economy allowed to our local governments leaves much to be desired. There is no need to present irrefutable evidence to prove that this submission carries the ring of truth. Our Local Government Code is already an old law but regrettably, it has not brought the boons of peace, progress and prosperity to filter down to our municipalities, cities and provinces. I need not convince you about the self-evident truth for your five senses will tell you it is the truth here in the Bicol Peninsula. Here in Bicol, you sit on the richest natural resources in our country yet your region suffers from underdevelopment. Here in Bicol, you have some of the most beautiful beaches, mountains and volcanoes in our country, yet your region has not developed into a tourist destination. Here in Bicol, you have a high variety of agricultural products with exportable grade but the lack of roads, ports and airports prevent you from enjoying their value. Even a sideglance at the state of your infrastructures --- your hospitals, your schools, your courthouses, your markets, your government offices --- will reveal their state of disrepair and obsolescence and the blame does not belong to your local governments. The fingerpointing and handwashing will never end but, the real culprit is the structure of government we have adopted in our Constitution. Since 1935 or for a little less than a century now, we have opted for a presidential, republican, democratic form of government in our country. As its name denotes and connotes, the President is the most powerful official in a presidential form of government. In the case of the Philippines, our Constitution granted more power to our President more than what other Constitutions have given their equivalent Presidents. For this reason, legal scholars concur in the view that in terms of power, the President of the Philippines wields more power than the President of the United States. If you examine further how the other powers of government have been allocated by our Constitution, you will appreciate more why we have a bogus local autonomy in our country. Consider the two other powers of government --- the legislative power and the judicial power. Under our Constitution, legislative power is given to our Congress and allows too little a power to local governments to enact their own laws. The judicial power is given to our Supreme Court and again, allows too little a power to local governments to interpret local laws. The end result is the overcentralization of powers in the national government. The powers niggardly given to local governments are few, if not insignificant. For this reason, local officials have to beg the powers that be in imperial Manila for assistance if they want to improve the lot of their constituencies. But even if local officials form a beeline to the powers that be in imperial Manila, with outstretched arms, palms open, and knees down, they are not sure of receiving any blessing for blessings belong only to those who belong to their political party. This is anathema to real democracy where the bottom line is power belongs to the people and power especially power that is only delegated to their representatives, whether elected or unelected, should only be exercised for the best interest of the people. We will never attain this desideratum, this ideal in a democracy unless and until we study the allocation and distribution of powers between our national and local governments. Our Constitution is circa 1987. It is a Constitution that has served its purpose, which is to purge the previous Constitution of its autocratic features that came from an authoritarian regime. After 26 years of enforcement, 13 years after the country crossed the 21st century, there is an obvious need to fine-tune our Constitution to accelerate the velocity of our progress. The need for progress to kick in in our country is more pronounced in our countryside, more especially our municipalities and provinces. The key to this much needed change is the grant of real autonomy to our local governments. Given the strictures and restrictions of our present Constitution, this desire for real autonomy may remain forever but just a dream. It is not bad to dream but it is best to put a deadline to our dreams. Thank you and God bless us all!
Posted on: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 02:28:47 +0000