Our system stinks
The history of governments tells us the lesson that the best government that can handle diversity is the democratic form, but more specifically, the federal-parliamentary species of democracy. More than any form of government, the federal government can best handle diversities driven by differences in culture, religion, language and geography because of its high threshold of tolerance to minorities. A contrario, unitary states where power is too centralized in the national government have failed to deal with the diversities inherent in people. In the graveyard of democracies you will find interred unitary states more than federal states.
Undeniably, we have a unitary form of government where power is centralized in the national government. In fine, our experience under a unitary-presidential form of government runs to 80 years now. The question is: What has this unitary-presidential form of government brought to our people?
One. We have a government where power is tilted too much in favor of the Executive. Not infrequently, the Executive has reduced the Legislature to a rubber stamp. In the authoritarian years of the 1970s and 1980s, the Legislature and the Judiciary were seduced to surrender their independence to the Executive. Arguably, the biggest abuse of power in our tripartite government has been committed in our Executive branch.
Two. At other times, however, our Legislature has been captured by a party different from the party of the president. Often the result is deadlock between the two branches. The spectacle in these stalemates is not edifying. Not infrequently, Congress will wield its power to investigate in aid of legislation. It will summon the president’s men suspected of violating the laws of the land to embarrass the administration. The Executive will strike back with its own low blows. The public is treated to a pintakasi where in the end we see not gamecocks but the welfare of the people dead on the ground.
Three. We have a Judiciary where too much is expected yet too little is given. Our Supreme Court is one of its kind in the world. Theoretically, it is a very powerful court given its expanded power to strike down anything done in our government “in grave abuse of discretion,” a phrase that can include anything under the sun. Add to that its awesome power to promulgate rules to protect the constitutional rights of the people, a power that is quasi-legislative in character, unusual to be given to a court under the principle of separation of powers. Yet for all the abundant powers granted the Supreme Court on paper, reality will reveal that the independence of the Judiciary is insufficiently insulated in our Constitution. The appointment process in the Judiciary is still infected by the political virus. Undeniably, it has never been given its financial independence by the political branches of the government. Lack of financial resources is one reason the Judiciary cannot liquidate its backlog of undecided cases.
Four. We have also created in our Constitution the Commission on Audit, the Civil Service Commission, the Commission on Human Rights and the Office of the Ombudsman. We are the only country that has put these offices on the constitutional pedestal. The intent is noble: to establish independent bodies that will assure our people of good government. Again, whether the performance of these offices has matched the expectations of the people is a good field of empirical study. The disquieting questions are: Have we solved—nay, even dissipated—violations of human rights? Have we controlled the runaway corruption in government? Have we produced a bureaucracy based on meritocracy? Have we checked the plunder committed on the money of the people?
Five. There is the immoral gap between the rich and the poor. We do not need to show the numbers for there can be no doubting Thomas who needs to be convinced of this self-evident truth. The immediate need to diminish this gap is beyond debate. Filipinos are migrating to foreign lands. It is time to reverse the mindset of our masses that the best way to live in the Philippines is to leave it. It is time to show them that their most valuable property is not their passport. It is time to end promises to the poor with nothing but sound and acoustic effects. The poor deserve a constitution where their basic socioeconomic rights can be demanded from the state as a matter of right and not just a right in the papyrus. They deserve a constitution where their voice in the political branches of government will be their own voice. The powerlessness of the people is the ultimate desecration of democracy.
Six. And this is arguably the most urgent problem that confronts our country: The paucity of power given to our local governments, especially the power to govern given to our Muslim brothers and sisters who constitute an identifiable minority and carry a distinct identity because of their different history, religion, language and culture. After hundreds of years, we must imbibe the lesson that under our unitary form of government, they cannot be given the government that they deserve, however much we want to. We ought to recognize that we must allow their diversity to flourish for there is value in diversity. Diversity is, in truth, the touchstone of democracy. Let us castrate the thought that we know best how to govern them when our relationship with them goes no deeper than the handshake level. We must disabuse our mind of the discarded idea that the sovereignty of a state is absolute, indestructible and indivisible, and, hence, cannot be shared with people and with aggregates of people. Federalism has exploded the myth that people with distinct identities cannot be trusted the right to rule themselves.
Federalism offers the best hope to our distinct minorities to be allowed self-rule.
It is my submission that federalism is best for a nation characterized by diversity. The Philippines is one of the most diverse nations in the world. It is composed of 7,107 islands. Its people are of the South Asian stock but intermarriage with other races has resulted in a great deal of stock blending. It has about 79 indigenous-ethnic groups, each with a distinct language, custom, tradition and art. About 80 percent of its people are Catholics. Some belong to the various Christian denominations. Five percent are Muslims but they claim the adherence of 11 percent of the population.
Two percent are Buddhists. Another two percent practice folk religion.
But the best offer of evidence to prove that our unitary-presidential form of government has not worked for our people is no other than our consistent mark as a “failing state” by international institutions with no ill motive to downgrade our democracy. We are a basket case. No wonder countries are now throwing their trash in our backyard. Our system of democracy stinks. Something must be rotten in it.
Reynato S. Puno is a former chief justice. This piece is excerpted from his keynote address at “Securing the Future: A Summit for Change” held last July 22 at Club Filipino in San Juan City.
