Finally,
A Democratic Congress?
Introduced in the 1998 elections, the party-list system is a backhanded acknowledgment of the historically unrepresentative and elitist character of the House of Representatives. Yet while opportunities are opened up for underrepresented or marginalized sectors, many believe that traditional political parties would still be hard to beat. Worse, the party-list system itself is under threat.
By IRIS CECILIA GONZALES and
SANDRA NICOLAS
Looking
at walls filled with glossy campaign posters of the many candidates for public
office, one might not even notice the fewer and less flashy posters put up by
marginalized sectors joining the party-list elections.
Senatorial and congressional wannabes have much deeper pockets than
party-list candidates and can afford to plaster wall after wall with layer upon
layer of their pictures.
It's
a tough game for these party-list aspirants and their scant resources seems to
limit their chances of winning. Certainly, in a political and electoral system
where it is normal for astronomical sums to be spent to secure public offices,
their low-key presence may even cause them to be mistaken for nuisances.
An
End To Elite-Dominated Congress?
The
aftermath of the Philippines' People Power uprising in 1986 saw changes in the
country's political system. While many political commentators predicted a return
to the essentially US-style two-party system that dominated Philippine politics
in the years before the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos' 20-year rule, many
Filipinos wanted genuine changes. They were yearning for greater democratization
of political life.
Yet
even as they dismantled the vestiges of martial rule, Filipino were also deeply
cynical of traditional party politics and traditional politicians, including the
pre-Marcos pattern of two-party dominated politics.
During
the drafting of a new constitution in 1986-87, there was a desire to move beyond
elite-dominated politics of either the authoritarian or the free-wheeling type.
One reflection of this was the inclusion of a party-list provision in the
electoral arrangements for the bicameral legislature.
Thus
the 1987 Constitution mandated that of the total number of members of the House
of Representatives (“two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by
law”), 20% were to be elected “through a party-list system of registered
national, regional, and sectoral parties or organizations.”
The
party-list provision was spelled out in Republic Act 7941, also known as the
Party-List System Act. Under RA 7941, each voter casts two votes for
representation in Congress — one for an electoral district and another for a
party-list party representing a marginalized sector. A party-list party is
entitled to a seat if it gets 2% of the total party-list votes cast. Each
additional 2%, meanwhile, gains an additional seat to a maximum of three seats.
RA
7941 lists the “marginalized” sectors: “labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban
poor, indigenous cultural communities, elderly, handicapped, women, youth,
veterans, overseas workers and professionals.” Ironically, it is the Filipinos
in these “marginalized” sectors that compose the overwhelming majority of
the population.
The
synchronized presidential, congressional and local elections of May 1998 were
the first to implement the party-list provisions. One hundred twenty-three
groups contested the party-list election.
Over
27 million people voted in the 1998 elections. But because of limited
understanding of the system, only 33.5% of the total number of voters (or just
9.2 million voters) cast votes for party-list groups.
Only
13 groups were able to get the necessary 2 % and thus clinch a seat in Congress.
Only one group, the Association of Philippine Electrical Cooperatives, managed
to get an additional seat by getting 5.5 percent of total party-list voters. The
other 12 groups covered the sectors of the urban poor, women, workers, peasants
and veterans.
And
yet there were 52 seats allotted for party-list parties. (Note an inconsistency
in the law where 52 seats are allotted yet the parties are required to get a
minimum 2%. Thus, it is arithmetically impossible for all 52
seats to be occupied.)
Embarrassed
by the poor showing at the polls, the Commission on Elections (Comelec) under
then Commissioner Harriet Demetriou decided to fill the 38 vacant seats by
appointing representatives from the groups placing 14th to 52nd.
Among those who would have gained seats was Joseph Victor Ejercito, son of
ousted President Estrada and chairman of the youth arm of his father's party Kabataan
ng Masang Pilipino (KAMPIL).
The
13 successful party-list candidates, who saw “grave and irreparable damage”
to their rights as winning candidates, filed a petition before the Supreme Court
(SC). The SC eventually issued a
temporary restraining order against proclaiming the “38 losers.”
Yet
observers note that the seeming progress toward the democratization of the Lower
House because of the party-list system is in practice undermined by two things
that threaten to make a mockery of the law.
First,
the congressmen genuinely representing marginalized groups will remain a very
small minority. The mandated 20% of the total number of seats is only a fifth of
the entire House. But even this will be divided among different parties with
different interests. It is unlikely, for instance, that workers or peasant
parties — representing the majority of the population — will take up the
entire 20%. Those that succeed will therefore still be just a few voices in a
House that remains dominated by Big Business and landlords.
Worse,
the big traditional parties (LAKAS-NUCD-UMDP, the Liberal Party, the Laban ng
Demokratikong Pilipino, the Nationalist People’s Coalition and the Kilusang
Bagong Lipunan) can already field their own party-list parties in the 2001
elections. Their command over electoral machinery and vast resources may mean
that 15 seats could, at a stroke, be lost to them. Beyond this, votes that might
have gone to other more deserving parties may also be taken, thus diminishing
further the chances of party-list groups.
There
are also groups representing far from marginalized sectors that want to exploit
the scheme for their narrow interests. About 270 groups have registered for
party-list accreditation with many evidently beyond the spirit and intent of the
law. These include such partisan groups as the Marcoses’ True Marcos Loyalists
and Estrada’s JEEP.
Among
those that applied for accreditation were 25 business groups including the
massive taipan-dominated Federation of Filipino-Chinese Chambers of Commerce and
Industry (FFCCCI) and the Chamber of Real Estate and Builders Associations (CREBA).
There were five big professional organizations including the Philippine Medical
Association, Philippine Dental Association and United Architects of the
Philippines.
There
were three military organizations, including the Guardians Center Foundation with rightist army
rebel leader Col. Billy Bibit, and eight security agencies. There were also 17 quasi-government groups including Mamamayang Ayaw sa
Droga.
Many
of these groups that are in no way marginalized have been allowed to run in the
May elections.
Secondly,
for those genuine party-list parties who make it to Congress, they will find
themselves treated as second-class representatives. They have less access to
resources and the inner circles of decision-making, greatly restricting their
capacity to act effectively. It is also striking that there is no mechanism for
representation of the “marginalized” in the Senate.
Thus,
three years after the first party-list elections, there are those who cannot be
faulted for thinking that the party-list system does not truly address the
problem of the concentration of political and economic power in the hands of a
few members of the elite.
The
party-list elections will again be held together with the regular elections for
national and local government officials in May 2001. As in 1986, the country has
undergone a change in leadership from a leader who broke the people’s trust;
the people still expect genuine changes in governance.
Various groups including the mainstream Left and others are joining the
electoral fray.
Bayan
Muna frontliner Satur Ocampo says that the elections open up important arenas to
advance the people’s welfare. “In addition to the parliament of the streets,
parliament itself will be used and benefits can be attained there.” Their
legislative agenda, he says, gives priority to the demands of the various
sectors. For instance, “from workers, there is the demand for a legislated pay
increase, for protection of workers’ rights to organize and advance their
social and economic welfare.” The peasant agenda will include
“counter-legislation to trade liberalization.”
The
longtime stalwart of the progressive mass movement also says that building
alliances with politicians, congressmen and senators, although already done
before, would be facilitated. (Prof.
Felipe Miranda of Pulse Asia discusses Bayan Muna’s high awareness rating.)
He
concedes that it's a tough race ahead for party-list contenders. But the anti-trapo
(traditional politician) campaign now being waged by nongovernment and militant
groups, he says, will help the people decide whom to vote for. Militant groups
such as the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) have added their voice to the
anti-trapo campaign and they are adamant that those who betrayed the
people should no longer be allowed to return to government through the May
elections.
Yet
the Comelec has been negligent in its responsibility to inform the electorate of
the party-list system. As a result, many voters still do not have adequate
knowledge about the new system and even the little opening it provides to help
end elite rule in Philippine politics is not maximized.
"This
is exactly the problem," says Rep. Edcel Lagman, elder brother of slain
labor leader Filemon "Popoy" Lagman.
Before he was gunned down at the University of the Philippines, Popoy was
set to launch a workers' party, the Partido ng Manggagawang Pilipino (PMP), that
will vie for party-list seats this May.
PMP
was launched anyway but the elder Lagman admits, "It's going to be a tough
fight." He pointed out that it would be difficult because the PMP and other
party-list aspirants "would have to compete with the traditional political
parties."
The
best solution to the problem, Lagman says, is to have a separate party-list
system elections because, according to him, "we can never compete with the
traditional political parties."
Sanlakas'
Renato “RC” Constantino says that another problem for party-list contenders
is not having enough resources for a nationwide campaign.
"So we have identified a few focus areas.
Our target is to achieve the requisite number of votes in these focus
areas alone. Anything else will be a bonus," he says. Sanlakas ran in the
party-list elections in 1998 and won a seat after placing 11th in the
field of 13.
PMP’s
Jerry Rivera, who is also a union member of the Philippine Airlines Employees
Association, agrees that party-list contenders usually do not have campaign
funds and resources as big as those of traditional political parties. Yet, he
claims, this means that because they are not accountable to any big businessmen
from the elite or the moneyed sector, "nothing is at stake and there are no
trade-offs, in terms of political agendas."
For former Senate president and constitutionalist Jovito Salonga, the right solution is indeed to educate the electorate, which, he says, still has a lot to learn to be able mature as a people. "The experience of the country under Estrada has left very important lessons which, hopefully, the electorate will not ignore," Salonga says. #