Just when the Philippines was beginning to join Asia’s emerging economies and was well on its way to becoming one of the fastest growing economies in the region, the Duterte administration has opted to rock the boat and insist on amending the 1987 Constitution to pave the way for a federal form of government, the path to which is fraught with dangers and uncertainties.
Constitutional experts and economists have repeatedly warned the President of the consequences on the country’s economy and political stability.
In November last year, former Supreme Court Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. cautioned against the rush to federalism, describing the move as “a lethal experiment, a fatal leap, a plunge to death, a leap to hell.” Davide cited 18 reasons he opposed federalism, foremost of which is the “bloating” of the bureaucracy with the creation of the regional governments.
Former national treasurer Leonor Briones, now Duterte’s education secretary, had voiced the same concern regarding the added layers of bureaucracy federalism would create, saying the creation of an additional layer of government—namely the state—will inevitably lead to higher levels of expenditures that will, according to her, inevitably lead to pressure for increased taxes.
Renowned economist Bernardo Villegas of the University of Asia and the Pacific also warned of federalism’s perils, which, he said could stoke “hyperinflation” and cede more powers than what many local government units (LGUs) are ready to handle. Calling the move counter-productive, Villegas said the shift could trigger “hyperinflation,” a situation when consumer prices are skyrocketing, sharply eroding the value of the local currency.
He said there’s “no rhyme, no reason” on how the so-called federal states in the Philippines were proposed to be organized.
Senate President Franklin Drilon also warned against the rush to federalism, saying that there is a need to submit the proposed shift to thorough and intelligent discussion. For example, he said, recent studies have shown that only three regions – National Capital Region, Central Luzon, and Southern Tagalog — can stand on their own under a federal form of government.
What will happen is, instead of allowing equal opportunities for development for the proposed states or regions, federalism might even stunt growth for many of the regions and for the entire country.
With political dynasties firmly entrenched in most of the proposed states under the draft Constitution submitted recently to Duterte by the Constitutional Commission he had formed just a few months ago, federalism could breed new or entrench old political dynasties. And it could easily transform into feudalism, instead of just federalism, with local politicians becoming feudal lords in their own fiefdoms.
This would spawn more private armies, more warlords, more expensive elections and wider opportunities for graft and corruption with the creation of new public offices. And more political killings, for sure, as politicians fight it over for rule of their own kingdom. I can imagine confusion as courts decide which falls under state or federal offenses.
Proponents of federalism point to countries such as the United States, Malaysia, Germany and Australia as examples of highly successful federal countries. But they fail to mention that these countries did not start as one nation but actually started as separate and independent states before they transformed themselves into one nation. It’s the reverse with what they want to do here, which is to transform one single state into separate autonomous states.
Proponents of federalism also fail to mention that contrary to economic growth that they are peddling, many federated countries have failed miserably, such as Brazil and Mexico. Senior economist Victor Abola, also of University of Asia and Pacific, said these two federal countries had the highest inflation in Latin America “because the federal state is not strong enough to control the local states.”
We don’t have to go far to cite an example of the failure of granting autonomy to various regions. We have had a brief look at having an autonomous state in the failed experiment called the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARRM) that only spawned a stronger, abusive political dynasty in the Ampatuan clan, an even chaotic governance, and an economy that insured the ARRM became the poorest region in the country.
Despite years of discussion, federalism is an issue that remains strange to millions of Filipinos. A survey by Pulse Asia last month found that 69 percent of those surveyed had “little to no knowledge” of the proposed federal form of government while only 31 percent said they knew a “great deal to sufficient.”
The study also found that 67 percent of Filipinos opposed charter change against 18 percent who favored it, and 14 percent who didn’t know and couldn’t answer. The same survey found that 62 percent of Filipinos were not in favor of replacing the present unitary system of government with a federal one.
The same survey showed 62 percent of Filipinos saying they were not in favor of replacing the present unitary system of government with a federal one. Of this figure, 34 percent said the system of government shouldn’t be changed “now or any other time,” while 28 percent said it might be changed “sometime in the future,” but now now, obviously believing that the country is not ready for it.
The proposed constitutional amendments would bring an abrupt change to a system that Filipinos have been accustomed to for decades and which, with proper governance, can bring the same or even better results. And besides, surveys after surveys have shown that there is no popular clamor for charter change nor for federalism. Why the rush then?
Duterte’s allies in Congress want to force its approval by convening a constituent assembly to tackle the draft constitution that seeks, among other things, a shift to parliamentary government and an end to term limits. Senate Majority Leader Juan Miguel Zubiri, an ally of Duterte, warned of a plot to make this move during the President’s State of the Nation Address (SONA) where the Senate and the House of Representatives would be convened in joint session.
Zubiri said most of, if not all, the senators would walk out if the House leaders, led by Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, call for constituent assembly during the SONA joint session. Alvarez and other House leaders want the two chambers to vote as one, and with the Senate outnumbered by the Duterte-controlled House, the latter could easily force the passage of the draft Constitution.
The congressmen can also adopt a proposal by Alvarez to postpone the mid-term elections next year that ensures a supermajority by Duterte allies for the next three years and beyond, and possibly the extension of Duterte’s term by 10 more years.
With their actions, Duterte’s allies have exposed the true reason for the rush to a shift to federalism. It’s all about power, after all.
(valabelgas@aol.com)