By the CENTER FOR PEOPLE EMPOWERMENT IN GOVERNANCE (CENPEG)
Analysis
Posted by Bulatlat
The current row in the presidential race regarding preference ratings and the alleged use of public funds for election infomercials has been expected, as in past elections. Sorely missed is accountability that should be raised as an issue in the coming national election – a benchmark for choosing who among the aspirants deserves to become the next President.
The reason for making accountability (“pananagutan” in Filipino) as a major electoral agenda springs from the abuse of presidential power – or the use of authority chiefly to perpetuate power – in recent years. Presidential power has been misused to commit election fraud, as in 2004, and as the invisible hand behind big-time corruption and plunder, among other alleged cases.
Presidential authority has also shielded its user from impeachment – the only constitutional mechanism available to check the abuse of power by the chief executive. Justice has been elusive to victims and survivors of human rights violations because the iron hand of the president vests alleged military-linked perpetrators with immunity from investigation and prosecution, including the chief executive herself for possible command responsibility.
The latest example of presidential abuse is the millions of taxpayers’ money spent for dinners during the president’s recent trip to New York and Washington D. C. The other time such display of conspicuous consumption in this age of mass poverty happened was during the Marcos years but then the number of foreign trips of the Marcoses in 20 years of their rule is less compared to the Arroyos’ 80 foreign trips in nine years. Department of Budget and Management (DBM) reports show that the presidential office had spent P2.8 billion for travel from 2001-2008 as against the total budget for eight years of P1.5 billion.
Promoted Aggressively
The abuse of presidential power has been promoted aggressively with the help of political patronage, cronyism, trade-offs, transactional and extortive corruption – as alleged – involving billions of foreign-funded development projects. It has also been pursued by packing the Cabinet and other agencies, including the foreign service, with political allies and senior military officials, and by promotions, perks, and spin doctors.
The rise of the Arroyo kleptocracy has led to the further weakening of the state institutions and governance mechanisms. It has made Congress, with the exception of some House members and senators, as a mere rubber stamp of the President thus rendering the system of checks and balances vis-à-vis the chief executive useless.
But even the monopoly of legislative power has not elevated Congress’ performance from mediocrity which is aggravated by the dominant members’ hardline stance against social and political reform measures such as the minimum wage, justice for Marcos torture victims, and the review of oil deregulation, automatic debt repayments, and other laws. As shown by the dominant members’ shooting down of four impeachment complaints against Mrs. Arroyo and several attempts at charter change, Congress has acted not only as a rubber stamp but an instrument for the perpetuation of presidential power.
Answerable
Accountability is the means by which the President – for that matter, all other elective and appointive officials – is answerable to all acts and decisions made during his/her term. Whether with respect to the chief executive or other officials in government, accountability is summoned by laws and the code of ethics and is guaranteed by several administrative and quasi-judicial mechanisms within the executive bureaucracy, as well as independent commissions and anti-graft judicial bodies; outside these are Congress and the Supreme Court.
Accountability is exercised not only in an election when a plunderer or an incompetent is voted out – for the damage has been done before the next election takes place in six years. It thrives when machineries function to make all elective and appointive officials culpable for the wrongs they committed – or promises undone – anytime.
The Filipino people’s low trust in the political leadership and government, as many opinion surveys will validate, can be attributed to the lack of an effective system of accountability – in all layers of the governance system. They cannot accept the fact of high officials being lawbreakers and enriching themselves while the services they have sworn to perform remain intangible.
