Analysis

On the Move to Change the Constitution:
Recycling the Elite

The political, social and economic “reforms” that the Cha-cha movers seek to infuse into a new charter will in fact entrench and further legitimize the rule of the political and economic elite while deepening foreign monopoly control of the country's economy. It is like prescribing a wrong remedy to a misdiagnosed sickness.

By Bobby Tuazon
Bulatlat.com

Today, Cha-cha is being revived at a time when Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo begins her six-year presidential term acquired, many Filipinos believe, through the dirtiest election ever held in 50 years. The living standards of most people are expected to deteriorate because of rising unemployment, high inflation, low income, widespread landlessness and – especially among the poor - the sheer loss of hope in having a better life.

Proponents of charter change, particularly Speaker Jose de Venecia and other legislators, may not realize it but when they point their finger to a problem their own thumbs are pointing at themselves. They express frustration, for instance, over the present bicameral legislature which they claim makes legislative work redundant, cumbersome and plagued by too much politics and deadlocks. But they themselves for all these years have steered the transformation of Congress into a market for grandstanding, cheap politics, corruption and, worst of all, boredom.

1987 Constitution

Despite its major defects, the 1987 Constitution provides for a bill of rights and upholds the sovereign power of the people as well as civilian supremacy over the military. While renouncing war, it enshrines the principles of independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. It abhors political dynasties and nepotism and, though controversial, it puts restrictions to foreign participation in the national economy.

Today, the same constitution is just a piece of paper thrown into the dump by the same legislators, executives, justices and military and police officials called upon to defend this so-called fundamental law of the land. It has been violated many times over through legislation and presidential edicts that tighten foreign monopoly control of the country’s economy; that ensure the continued plunder of our natural wealth; the abandonment of state’s responsibility to the citizenry in education and social welfare; the continued violations of human rights; and the renewed political and armed intervention in the country by a foreign power.

Adopt whatever change they want for the country’s government system, but the same political elite will still lord over the new dispensation. The proposal for a parliamentary system, for instance, fuses the executive and legislative powers, with the prime minister – who is a member of parliament – elected by the same chamber. The new system, say de Venecia, et al, promises to prevent or minimize legislative gridlock. Aside from ensuring stability and continuity in governance, it also helps deter military coups and authoritarian rule by the executive.

But the proposal lacks two conditions that are supposed to make the parliamentary system functional: A viable two-party or multi-party system and the principle of having the head of government (the prime minister) without a fixed term.

Recycling traditional politicians

The first condition cannot be met given the deeply-rooted, traditional party system that is grounded on personalities, patronage and the absence of any distinct ideological or political platform. The new parliament will certainly be constituted by the same legislators involved in the Cha-cha (if Congress turns itself into a constituent assembly to change the constitution) or by a new set of assemblymen whose election would be based on personality, wealth and power.

The country’s traditional politics – which will remain essentially unchanged under the parliamentary regime – will not allow a different set of members or political parties to gain seats in the new legislature on the basis of alternative policy programs or ideologies. Just look at how the Macapagal-Arroyo administration, which supports the constitutional change, put roadblocks – through killings, fraud and terrorism – against the progressive party-list bloc, indicating that the political elite loathes politics based on issues and programs.

The “no fixed-term” system is based on the classic principle that what is actually fixed is the regularity of the election for the members of parliament, i.e., every four or six years, as the case may be. This may also mean that the parliamentarians have no fixed term themselves because their tenure will be based on the regular elections. Elections however may not wait if the prime minister (PM) loses – by a vote - the confidence of the whole parliament, in which case the PM – through his party – will submit himself to a new election. But it is also possible that the PM can stay in power indefinitely if his entire party will vote on his side: voting against him is a vote against their own selves, and all of them will have to submit to a new election called, probably, by the ceremonial head of state, the president.

Indeed, a tyrannical or inept prime minister can actually perpetuate himself in power this way. Otherwise, because of the traditional greed for power, opposition members of parliament will spend most of their time trying to unseat the incumbent prime minister.

Federalism, particularly the type proposed by Sen. Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. seeks to divide the archipelago into 10 states with each having its own government and legislature and enjoying a certain level of autonomy. The proposal, supported by constitutionalists such as Jose V. Abueva, considers the country’s archipelagic character, regional and ethnic diversity. It also envisions to address the centuries-old Moro problem and the equitable distribution of power and resources.

But the proposal will in fact perpetuate the traditional political system that is borne out of the semi-feudal system. While the current presidential system supports a strong chief executive who acquires and remains in power by patronage, it also allows political dynasties and clans to monopolize political and economic power in the provinces. Not only will the federal system entrench these power turfs it will also subject the people to prolonged local despotism and exploitation. Economic and political resources that federalism aims to distribute equitably among the new states will just be monopolized by the local powers-that-be.

Economic “reforms”

More threatening, however, is the move by Cha-cha advocates to remove the restrictive provisions of the 1987 Constitution pertaining to the country’s economy, natural wealth, trade and foreign investment which, so they aver, have “limited the country’s ability to compete in the global economy.” Cha-cha proponents seek to liberalize economic laws in order to allow full foreign multinational participation in land ownership; in the exploitation of the country’s mining, forest and fishery resources; and in trade and investment. They also want foreign investment entry in the operation of public utilities, franchises and infrastructure; in mass media and advertising; and in educational institutions.

Foreign investors will be allowed to take over public schools – including state universities and colleges – or operate private ones supposedly to make these more viable and to avail of information technology and, hence, to make education compliant to global standards. Once adopted, the proposal will accelerate the privatization and commercialization of the University of the Philippines and other premier state institutions. Educators, students and other critics of the current educational system will find this proposal ridiculous yet worrisome as it would make learning more profit-oriented and extremely inaccessible to the youth.

As a whole, the political, social and economic “reforms” that the Cha-cha movers seek to infuse into a new charter will in fact entrench and further legitimize the rule of the political and economic elite while deepening foreign monopoly control of the country's economy. Their proposal will aggravate the oppressive and exploitative conditions that the elite and their foreign masters have in the first place inflicted on the Filipino people. It only intends to create an illusion that the misrule and economic woes that they themselves have wrought are remediable through a simple change in the constitution. It is like prescribing a wrong remedy to a misdiagnosed sickness. Bulatlat.com

Back to top

We want to know what you think of this article.