Federalism: Antidote to Separatism?

Another move is afoot to amend the 1987 Constitution. Previous measures to tinker with the charter had been rejected twice by the people – during the Ramos and Estrada presidencies – as politically motivated. This time, the mode is being set to attract legislative support for a constitutional amendment through a proposal purported to be the “panacea” to the country’s political ills. Bulatlat.com dissects this proposal in two parts: the summary of the proposal itself and, in the second part, a critique of the measure.

 (First of two parts)

By Edmundo Santuario III

In the congressional blueprint is a proposal that seeks to change the present unitary government into a federal system. The plan, says its architect, Jose Abueva, a political scientist and former president of the University of the Philippines (UP), would enhance “nationhood, democracy and progress.”

The proposal also seeks to amend the 1987 Constitution by 2008 to pave the way for the adoption of the federal system.

In the Senate, the federalism bill was proposed late last year by Senate President Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. and Sens. Francisco Tatad and John Osmeña. Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago, chair of the Senate committee on constitutional amendments, said she would call for a constitutional convention to take up the proposal. Ratification of the bill would have been scheduled in the May 14 elections.

Support for the scheme came from Mindanao politicians, including Rep. Michael Mastura who described federalism as “the antidote to secession.” Macapanton Abbas, Jr., chair of the Islamic Directorate of the Philippines, joined in.

The proposal, which is expected to generate wider support after the May polls, is timed as the Philippines is at a crossroads of sorts.

Last January, millions of Filipinos enraged by high-level corruption, economic plunder and gangsterism, rose to topple the discredited president, Joseph Estrada, in what is now known as People Power 2. The people did it 15 years earlier, when the first civilian uprising broke out that led to the downfall of the Marcos dictatorship.

The people troop to the polls on May 14 but the country remains torn by two wars – the Moro secessionist war and the Marxist-led people’s democratic revolution.

The Moro secessionist war in Mindanao has been raging since 1969 with its leadership now under the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF). President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who vowed to reverse Estrada’s all-out war into an all-out peace policy, is resuming talks with the Moro rebels. But it remains uncertain, however, whether the talks would bear fruit with both sides poles apart on the basics for a negotiated settlement.

Peace talks are also to resume with the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP), whose revolutionary forces have been waging a people’s war leading to a people’s democratic government since 1968. The talks, to begin April 27 in Oslo, Norway are to advance to the more contentious social and economic reforms (SER) agenda.

Moro Problem

In particular, Pimentel is convinced that the federalism scheme is the answer to the Moro problem. During the Aquino presidency, he authored the local government code which devolved certain political powers and administrative functions to local government units (LGUs).

Abueva presented his proposal at the recent “Mindanao Stakeholders Forum” in Cagayan de Oro City.

The former UP president envisions a two-stage process for the shift from the present unitary system to a federal one which will begin this year and will end in 2010.

In the transitional stage (2000-2009), the 14 existing administrative regions will be reorganized into 10 larger administrative or “socio-economic regions.” The local governments are given more substantial autonomy as “proto-states” of an emergent federalism.

The 10 administrative regions are: Metro Manila, Northern Luzon, Cordillera, Central Luzon, Southern Tagalog, Bicol-Samar, Visayas-Palawan, Western Mindanao, Bangsa Moro and Eastern Mindanao. Metro Manila will be the national capital and the site of the federal government.

In 2008, the charter will be amended to pave the way for the adoption of the federal system. The amendments will be ratified by the people in a plebiscite to be held the following year.

The Abueva proposal calls for the federal government to exercise concurrent powers and functions with the component states in such fields as science and technology, education, health and welfare, agricultural development, trade and industry, transportation and communication, protection of labor and workmen’s compensation, and national culture and the arts.

Exclusive to the federal government are national powers and functions involving national policy, planning and legislation, national security and defense, foreign relations, monetary system, federal appellate courts of justice, civil service, elections and audit.

All other powers and functions, Abueva said, will belong to the states and their local governments. These include certain powers of taxation, fund-raising and borrowing.

10-Year Timeframe

Why he chose a 10-year timeframe for the shift to federalism, Abueva said: “The whole decade would allow the nation ample time to undergo the transition stage of building the enlarged administrative regions and giving them substantial autonomy as ‘proto-states,’ and then preparing the federalization scheme and the specific constitutional changes to be submitted for the people’s ratification.”

He argued that a federal system would bring about national unity and identity while preserving the nation’s cultural diversity and social pluralism.

His other assumptions are: a) the Philippines is ready for a federal system since it has achieved “sufficient national unity and democratization, including a measure of decentralization and local autonomy”; b) there have been growing difficulties and frustration with the country’s highly-centralized unitary system hence, the 1987 Constitution’s design for “participatory democracy, local autonomy and an active role for civil society in governance”; c) federalism will respond to the demands of local leaders for their release from the costly, time-consuming, stifling and demoralizing effects of excessive centralization and controls by the national government in the unitary system.”

“By removing the centralized structures that impose local dependence and stifle local initiative and resourcefulness and thus providing greater freedom and home rule, a federal system will greatly increase the capacity of the people and the government to deal with the country’s chronic problem of poverty, injustice and inadequate social services and infrastructure – the manifestations of undervelopment,” Abueva said.

(Conclusion: A Crisis Needing a Surgical Solution)