This story
was taken from Bulatlat, the Philippines's alternative weekly
newsmagazine (www.bulatlat.com, www.bulatlat.net, www.bulatlat.org).
Vol. V, No. 46, January 1-7, 2006
ANALYSIS
Burying People Power
Preventing changes in government through “People Power” uprisings is among the
reasons for the proposal to shift to a parliamentary system, in which changing
governments will supposedly be institutionalized rather than left to direct
people’s action. BY
CENTER FOR PEOPLE EMPOWERMENT IN GOVERNANCE
constitutional
amendments via a Constituent Assembly are likely to take place despite
Senate resistance. When this happens it will finally put an end to the
progressive legacies of EDSA 1 as these are contained in its most outstanding
achievement, the 1987 Constitution. Although EDSA 1 as an
expression of People Power has been correctly criticized for its many failures,
it nevertheless did produce a Constitution distinguished by nationalist
provisions, a Bill of Rights that enhanced Constitutional protection of free
expression, and the provision for party-list representation as a means of
broadening the base of the elite-based political system. As has been evident since
agitation for amendments was initiated by former President Fidel Ramos over a
decade ago, among the provisions of the 1987 Constitution being targeted for
amendment are paragraph (2), Section 5, Article VI, which mandates party-list
representation in the House of Representatives; Article XII (National Economy
and Patrimony) which among others limits certain areas of investments to
corporations that are 60% Filipino owned, and prohibits the grant of public
utility franchises to corporations that are wholly foreign-owned; and paragraph
(1) Section 11, Article XVI (General Provisions) which bans foreign ownership of
the mass media. This is in addition to the
oft repeated and already proposed amendments to Articles VI (the legislature)
and VII (The Executive Department) which would effect a shift from the
presidential to the parliamentary system of governments and install a unicameral
legislature. Additional provisions to effect these changes as well as the
possible creation of a Federal system are likely to be proposed. All are likely
to be adopted by a Constituent Assembly made up of the same self-seeking
politicians now resident in the House of Representatives. Constitutional amendments
have been described as part of a supposed reformist effort to address the
“weakness” of the 1987 Constitution. But they will make reforms not only even
more difficult than they already are. They will make them almost impossible, not
because Constitutional amendments are necessarily regressive, but because those
proposing them—the worst of the country’s traditional politicians—are not
interested in reform, but in stifling them. Although it is not its
primary aim, preventing changes in government through “People Power” uprisings
is among the reasons for the proposal to shift to a parliamentary system, in
which changing governments will supposedly be institutionalized rather than left
to direct people’s action. Former President Fidel
Ramos and company began agitating for amendments to the Constitution over 10
years ago to keep Ramos in power. The target at the time was the abolition of
term limits, which would enable Ramos to run for a second term. The ban on a second
presidential term was driven by Philippine experience, in which presidents used
their first terms to campaign for a second. The framers of the 1987
Constitution rightly felt that one six-year term would be enough for a president
to focus on his program of government rather than on being reelected. The wisdom of that view has
been validated by the case of Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, who came to power in 2001
with three years to complete Joseph Estrada’s unfinished term. Mrs. Arroyo
spent the entire period preparing for 2004, utilizing in the process not only
government resources but also the considerable clout of the presidency to
prevail in the May 2004 elections. Mrs. Arroyo herself joined
the Cha-Cha charade only last July, when her presidency was on the brink of
collapse. Charter change was the life-line Ramos threw her then, when he
proposed that Mrs. Arroyo commit to them in return for Ramos’, House Speaker
Jose de Venecia’s, and the ruling Lakas-CMD coalition’s support. In her July 25 State of the
Nation Address, Mrs. Arroyo thus threw her support behind Cha-Cha out of sheer
self-interest, claiming that it wasn’t the political class and dynasties to
which she belongs that are blocking reform and making elections a farce, it was
the presidential system. The Ramos-De Venecia-Lakas
CMD scheme was simple enough. A shift to the parliamentary system would give
Mrs. Arroyo a graceful exit if she wants it—or, as proffered her by the
55-person rubber stamp Consultative Commission she appointed, allow her to
finish her term by making her head of state and president from 2007 to 2010.
Depending on who does the amending of the Charter, every politico who will have
to give up power under the elaborate system of term limits the drafters of the
1987 Constitution devised could stay in his or her post, and run again, this
time under unspecified terms, and without any limit. Ramos, De Venecia and
company, with the not disinterested support of Mrs. Arroyo, also want to
accelerate the globalization process primarily through the elimination of the
nationalist provisions of the 1987 Constitution. The benefits the unrestricted
entry of foreign capital can mean to the second most corrupt government in
Southeast Asia are not likely to have been lost to them and their allies either. The campaign for
Constitutional amendments is thus being driven by the traditional politicians’
discovery, as early as the 1990s, that as imperfect as they are, most of the
provisions of the 1987 Constitution meant to minimize control by the political
dynasties and to limit their power, open law-making to marginalized sectors,
and stem the tide of globalization, were somehow working. It is the traditional
politicians who are now moving heaven and earth to amend the 1987 Constitution.
What their amendments will do is bury People Power forever by once more
consigning the poor and their representatives in the margins of the political
process, and restoring the monopoly of political power to the handful of
families for whom the legacies of EDSA 1 have become a hindrance to their and
their foreign patrons’ total dominance of Philippine politics and government.
Posted by Bulatlat © 2006 Bulatlat
■
Alipato Publications Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.
Posted by Bulatlat