Arroyo’s Charter Change May Lead to Constitutional Authoritarianism – Analyst

A political analyst said that the charter change being pushed by the Arroyo administration can lead to what he described as “constitutional authoritarianism.” The term “constitutional authoritarianism” was first used by former President Ferdinand Marcos to describe the martial law regime.

BY ALEXANDER MARTIN REMOLLINO
Bulatlat

A political analyst said the Charter change being pushed by the Arroyo administration can lead to what he described as “constitutional authoritarianism.”

The term “constitutional authoritarianism” was first used by former President Ferdinand Marcos to describe the martial law regime. The Philippine Constitution ratified in 1973 through farcical people’s “assemblies” removed all legal barriers to the martial rule that then President Ferdinand Marcos imposed a year earlier.

“It’s interesting that in surveys, people who are saying they are in fact for Charter change are saying that they also would like elections, they would also like to have the power to elect the president directly,” said Dr. Benjamin Tolosa, Jr., chairman of Ateneo de Manila University’s Political Science department.

“But all of these would be removed in the amendments presently being pushed,” he added. “It’s problematic in that sense. It concentrates power further.”

Under President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s Charter change agenda, the present presidential form of government would be replaced by a parliamentary system. The government would be headed by a prime minister to be elected by members of Parliament.

Tolosa, who is also an acting coordinator of the advocacy group Pugad-Lawin, which is largely Ateneo-based, further said there could be a problem with the checks and balances under the parliamentary system being pushed by Arroyo because of the fusion of executive and legislative powers. “This is especially because the kind of political system we have right now is really based on families and patronage,” he pointed out.

Tolosa’s observations on Arroyo’s push for a parliamentary form of government is similar to the analysis of lawyer Vicky Avena, a former commissioner of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), in an earlier interview with Bulatlat.

“In a country like the Philippines where democracy has not fully matured, when you remove the system of checks and balances and shift to a parliamentary form of government, when they conspire against the people, the result is total control,” Avena had said. “They can easily pass any law that would violate our rights.”

“It’s worse than martial law,” Avena also said. “At least under martial law, there are limits and when you abuse it’s already illegal. But under a parliamentary system, anything they want to do can be legalized even if it’s in violation of international covenants and treaties. That is total control.”

Avena said that if Arroyo could impose repressive measures under the present form of government, she could more easily do so under a parliamentary system.

Arroyo had run afoul with the Constitution after the Supreme Court declared three measures she recently imposed – the calibrated preemptive response (CPR) policy, Executive Order No. 464, and part of Proclamation No. 1017 – as unconstitutional.

The CPR provided for a blanket prohibition on protest actions. EO 464 prevented government officials from testifying in congressional hearings without clearance from the president.

Meanwhile, the Arroyo government purportedly issued Proclamation No. 1017 on Feb. 25 to prevent a coup attempt by elements of the “extreme Left” and “extreme Right.” The said proclamation was issued hours after the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) claimed to have thwarted a mutiny to be led by Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim and Col. Ariel Querubin of the Philippine Marines.

The issuance of Proclamation No. 1017 led to the arrests of a number of progressive leaders and other opposition personalities – including Anakpawis (toiling masses) Rep. Crispin Beltran, who is still in detention. Authorities likewise tried to arrest the representatives now known as the Batasan 5 – Satur Ocampo, Teddy Casiño, and Joel Virador of Bayan Muna (people first), Rafael Mariano of Anakpawis, and Liza Maza of the Gabriela Women’s Party (GWP).

At present, one of the measures pending at the House of Representatives is a resolution by Cagayan de Oro City Rep. Constantino Jaraula calling on Congress to convene into a constituent assembly to change the Constitution. It is expected to be tackled when Congress resumes session this coming July.

Congress may convene into a constituent assembly upon a vote of 3/4 of all its members, which means that the Senate and the House of Representatives would be voting as a single body. The Senate is largely anti-charter change, with 20 out of 23 members opposing moves to amend the Constitution.

Should the Arroyo administration fail to achieve charter change through a constituent assembly, the remaining option would be to try it through a constitutional convention.

Congress can call for such a convention by a vote of 2/3 of all its members or, by a majority vote of all its members, submit to the people the question of calling such convention. The delegates to the constitutional convention would have to be elected by the people. Bulatlat 

BACK TO TOP ■  PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION  ■   COMMENT

© 2006 Bulatlat ■  Alipato Publications

Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.