Analysis 

Charter Change: 
A Counter-Revolutionary Charade

It is a fact that more and more people have lost trust in government and have entertained doubts about the way “democracy” is run by the powers-that-be. Charter change is the elite’s way of showing to the broad masses that bourgeois democracy is capable of reinventing or reconstructing itself through a “democratic exercise.” The mechanism gives a false sense of hope and a diversionary route at a time when more and more people are headed for the revolutionary movement that aims to bring about comprehensive changes in society.

By Bobby Tuazon 
Bulatlat.com

It is ironical that the move to change the constitution comes from members of the political elite that has shown itself not only unfit to rule but has long monopolized power for its own class interests. So many times, the Filipino people have spoken against any proposal to change the charter suggesting that such a scheme is only meant to perpetuate its proponents in power and not because they want to institute reform. They would rather that government should prioritize its obligation of ensuring that food is available, that there is job for all and that the country’s future is bright.

In the current political dispensation, the country’s first constitution – the 1935 charter – established the country’s presidential form of government, the separation of powers and the two-party system. Under U.S. colonial tutelage, the charter was crafted by representatives of the country’s elite who made sure that domestic rule would remain under the hands of the elite and tied the country forever to a neo-colonial relationship with the Americans. The charter did not address the society’s fundamental problems particularly feudal land ownership that aroused peasant masses to take up arms.

The rise of nationalism and the cultural propaganda movement in the mid-60s directly challenged elite rule leading to the split and intense rivalry among the country’s political factions. In the face of it all, President Ferdinand Marcos, after getting himself reelected in the 1969 election that was fraught with fraud and terrorism, moved to change the constitution and perpetuate himself in power.

The 1971 constitutional convention brought the country to crisis as Marcos was accused of bribing members of the convention to make the new charter in his favor amid a burgeoning national democratic movement. With U.S. President Richard Nixon’s support, Marcos imposed martial law the following year and got himself a constitution to legitimize his one-man rule. To deodorize a repressive rule, Marcos amended his own constitution to pave the way for a parliamentary system with himself remaining a dictator and another American lackey, Cesar Virata, as titular prime minister.

Populist façade

Corazon Aquino, who succeeded Marcos following the 1986 people’s uprising, tried to present a populist façade by appointing a few members of the progressive social movement to the constitutional commission ensuring, however, that the body that was tasked to draft a new charter is dominated by the elite including remnants of the dreaded Marcos dictatorship like Blas Ople. Stripped of its human rights provisions which were never followed anyway, the Aquino constitution virtually reinstituted the status quo rule of the country’s elite while it failed in its pledge to empower the people through a multi-party system, a new local government system and a fraudulent agrarian reform.

Proof that the new charter never brought any meaningful change at all is that the Marcoses and their subalterns are back in power and that the strong militarist influence is as alive as ever. It has never shielded the country from renewed attacks of U.S. imperialism to fortify its neo-colonial rule through economic, political and military means.

Fidel V. Ramos and Joseph Estrada tried several times to amend the constitution for their own political agenda and in order to entrench pro-imperialist globalization policies. But their attempts were rejected by nationwide mass protests led by the organized militant mass movement.

Some of the leading proponents of charter change today are the same people and groups who had earlier pushed for the same scheme in recent past. Their proposal to change the form of government from presidential to parliamentary or from a unilateral to a federal system had been exposed as a lame excuse to perpetuate themselves in power or to make themselves available to occupy new powerful positions which are otherwise unavailable in the present system.

The plan to amend the constitution will be made by people who embody the same narrow political interests that figured in previous charter changes. Changing the form of government will not democratize the allocation of power from the elite to the broad masses who have, through decades of bourgeois democracy, remained in the sidelines. Political power and the distribution of political offices and institutions will remain in the hands of those who possess the material wealth that is the sole source of power in this country. As a result, this charade will not address, nay, will only aggravate class exploitation and oppression – the same system that is the bedrock of U.S. neo-colonial domination in our semi-feudal society.

Token reform

Changing the form of government within the context of the semi-feudal and semi-colonial society is the ruling elite’s way of dangling a token of reform in these times of crisis or when its various factions cannot reconcile for the peaceful allocation of power. It is a fact that more and more people have lost trust in government and have entertained doubts about the way “democracy” is run by the powers-that-be. Charter change is the elite’s way of showing to the broad masses that bourgeois democracy is capable of reinventing or reconstructing itself through a “democratic exercise.” The mechanism gives a false sense of hope and a diversionary route at a time when more and more people are headed for the revolutionary movement that aims to bring about comprehensive changes in society.

The current proponents of charter change hide the fact that the elite has long shown themselves unfit to rule precisely because government has been used to advance their narrow economic and political interests at the expense of the people. Decades of misrule, politicking, economic mismanagement, graft and corruption have only allowed the elite to amass more wealth and sustain the social system that is undemocratic and anti-poor. They must not be allowed to bring this nation to extinction. There must be another way of saving this country from the vagaries of the power elite. Bulatlat.com 

We want to know what you think of this article.