Federalism is warlordism in disguise
Considering our current political reality, the Duterte administration will bring the Philippines back to the Middle Ages if it changes the form of government to federalism.
The administration appears hell-bent on pushing federalism, according to news coming from the provinces. Leaders identified with the administration are said to be holding regular forums all over the country, selling the idea of the need to overhaul the 30-year-old Constitution by changing its political engine from unitary to a federal system.
This low-key but well-oiled nationwide campaign to convince the people that it is time to replace the kind of government that we have appears to be taking place pursuant to the timetable set by President Duterte, who, upon winning last year, declared that he would submit the federalism issue to a plebiscite or referendum within two years.
The problem cited by the administration to explain its push for the shift to federalism is the neglect of the provinces by “Imperial Manila.” This argument plays on the resentment of the provinces against central control from Malacañang. It is pointed out that this resentment is particularly serious in the Visayas and Mindanao.
The advocates of federalism may well be correct in identifying a notable problem that besets the country. But are they prescribing the correct solution?
If the neglect of the national leadership is solved by a shift to federalism, what do we do with the equally or even more worrying dilemma that, under a federal system, more power will be handed over to provincial warlords and their dynastic families who have perfected the use of political power as a tool of corruption? About 70 percent of provincial leaders belong to political dynasties.
Under the current unitary system, a neglectful president comes and goes every six years, and the country has a renewed chance every presidential election to elect a national leader who will be more attentive to the needs of the provinces.
In contrast, under a federal system, political warlords and their families who have been entrenched in their positions for generations will end up receiving additional power that will again be prone to abuse and that will further strengthen their grip on their turf.
In the current unitary system, it is almost impossible for political neophytes armed only with principles to have a chance at winning in provincial elections against incumbent officials belonging to political dynasties. These dynasts have mastered the illicit ways of employing government resources in aid of electoral advantage, and as warlords they accumulate war chests from their use of power. This problem will get even worse if the country shifts to a federal system where warlords and their families will get even more powerful.
Federalism is warlordism in disguise — unless the state of our politics is changed.
Advocates of federalism claim that the unitary system has failed in this country, but they are totally silent on the fault of the leaders who make the system fail. The leaders who make the unitary system fail will be the same leaders who will find loopholes and crevices to make the federal system fail.
Advocates of federalism cite the system’s success in countries that have adopted it. But federalism works in those countries, not because the system has success-ensuring mechanisms, but because their political leaders have been disabled from misusing power and their citizens have been enabled to fight abuses of power.
Instead of a cosmetic legacy like federalism, President Duterte should work for change-inducing advocacies such as the passage of antidynasty and freedom of information laws, and strengthen and not undermine an Ombudsman who exacts accountability from leaders who misuse power. A true and lasting legacy of any president is a system of laws and a culture of governance that disempower abusive leaders and empower a long-suffering people.
Comments to [email protected]
