Federalism Discussion

IS FEDERALISM THE ANSWER ?

       According to Wikipedia, the Philippines is a unitary state with some powers devolved to Local Government Units (LGUs) under the terms of the Local Government Code. There  is also one autonomous region, which is the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. Over years various modification have been proposed to the constitution of the Philippines, including possible transition to a federal system as part of shit to a parliamentary system . In 2004, Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo established the consultative commission which suggested such a charter change but no action was taken by the Philippine Congress to amend the 1987 Constitution. 

                Current and most debatable issues in the Philippines, is the determined campaign of the current President Rodrigo Roa Duterte to switch to federalism type of government. Many Filipinos are unaware of federalism , the information are not disseminated much enough to Filipino understanding, the Philippine congress and senate have different opposing views and opinion regarding to the transition , means or ways of transition are not profound yet, while the majority of the public are mostly puzzled.

            Not all Filipino are aware that this form of government was first proposed by our former Presidents,  I am not only pertaining to former President Gloria-Macapagal Arroyo(currently Pampanga representative) but  the late former President Emilio Aguinaldo together with our National Hero Apolinario Mabini. They were the first to choose federalism type of government.

            Before we discuss the history and reasons behind previous attempts , let us first define federalism. What is federalism?

Ano ang FEDERALISM o PEDERALISMO?

            According to the Wikipedia, Federalism is the mixed or compound mode of government, combining a general government(the central or ‘federal’) with regional governments (provincial, state, cantonal, territorial or other sub-unit governments) in a single political system. Its distinctive feature, exemplified in the founding example of modern federalism of the United States of America under the Constitution of 1787, whereas it is a relationship of parity between two levels of  government established. It can thus be defined as a form of government in which there is a division of powers between two levels of government of equal status.

            Samakatuwid, ang pederalismo ay pinaghalo o magkahalong sistema ng pagpapatakbo ng pamahalaan, kung saan pinagsasama ang pangkalahatang pamamahalaan (general ,central or federal) at  ang pamahalaang rehiyonal(provincial, state). Ang pinagkaiba ng ganitong sistema ng pamamahala  ay maari nating gawing halimbawa ang makabagong pamahalaang federalismo  ng Estados Unidos na nasusulat sa kanilang 1787 konstitusyon, ipinapakita sa konstitusyon ng Estados Unidos , na ang federalismo ay relasyong magkapantay o magkatumbas sa pagitan ng dalawang lebel ng pamahalaang itinatag. Ibig sabihin ang Federalismo ay isang uri ng pamahalaan kung saan mayroong paghahati-hati  sa pamamahala o pamamalakad sa pagitan ng dalawang lebel ng pamahalaan (sentro at estado), ang bawat estado ay may pareho o magkatumbas kalayaan, kapangyarihan at kakayanan gumawa ng batas na ipaiiral sa kanilang mga nasasakupan.

Federalism is not a common system of government, in fact only 11 countries out of more than 190 countries are federated. These are Switzerland, Germany, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, United States of America , Canada, Australia, India ,Austria and Malaysia are among the countries with Federalism type of government. Most of these countries are democratic like the Philippines. When Democracy brushed through these countries their country dissolved into many smaller nation. Which means that if democracy is swept in the country of the Philippines, the Philippines will then be dissolve into smaller nation. 

The question of ,How the Philippines will be divided into smaller nation? Is another devolving problem and debating issues that will rise together with the proposed transition. Since , in federalism type of government, there should be a central and a regional(provincial or state) government whereas the regional government is composed of different state that is propose to be establish.

Ibig sabihin, kung ang Pilipinas ay magpapalit ng sistema ng pamahalaan, siguradong  ang pagsasama ng mga rehiyon at probinsya ay magiging isang malaking debate at argumento sa pagbubuo ng mga estado ng Pilipinas. Sa kaslukuyan, ang Pilipinas ay binubuo ng  17rehiyon at 81 na probinsya. Ang unang katanungan ay , Sa papaanong paraan ma- aamyendahan ang 1987 konstitution ng pilipinas? Pangalawa, anu-ano ang mga dahilan ng pagpapalit ng sistema ng pamahalaan?Pangatlo ay, sa ilang estado ba dapat hatiin ang pilipinas?Pang-apat, kung pantay ang karapatan ng lahat ng estado, Papa-ano mareresolba ang magiging posibleng suliranin sa hinaharap ng magkaibang estado.  

Before, I proceed to this discussion, let us analyze first the factors that maybe affecting the proposal of switching to federalism type of government. We will do this by discussing the Federalism History of the Philippines.

FEDERALISM IN THE PHILIPPINES(according to Wikipedia)

Emilo Aguinaldo and Apolinario Mabini intended the Philippines to be divided into 3 three federal states, which is Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao.

Transition to federal type of government means amendment of the Philippine constitution, while amendments of the constitution is through constitutional reform .According to Wikipedia, Constitutional reform in the Philippines also known as charter change or Cha-Cha, refers to the political and legal processes needed to amend the current 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. Under the common interpretation of the Constitution , amendments can be proposed by one of the three methods, which is through People’s Initiative, a Constituent Assembly (Con-Ass) or a Constitutional Convention(Con-Con). A Fourth method is, by both houses passing a joint concurrent resolution, with three-fourth supermajority, has been proposed by House Speaker Feliciano Belmonte, Jr., who subsequently submitted to the House of Representatives ”Resolution of Both Houses No. 1”. The “simple legislation as the means to amend” would require approval by both Houses voting separately.

All proposed amendments, regardless  of the method of proposal, must be ratified by a majority vote in a national referendum. While no amendment to the 1987 constitution has succeeded, there has been several high-profile attemps. None reached the ratification by referendum stage.

Amendment Attemps.

Ramos Administration.

            The first attempt to amend the 1987 Constitution was under President Fidel Ramos. Among the proposed changes in the constitution included a shift to a parliamentary system and the lifting of term limits of public officials. Ramos argued that the changes will bring more accountability, continuity, and responsibility to the “gridlock”- prone Philippine version of Presidential bicameral system. Some politically active religious groups, opposition politicians, business tycoons and left-wing organization opposes the process that was supposed to lead to a national referendum. Critics argued that the proposed constitutional changes for one would benefit the incumbent, Ramos.

            On September 21, 1997, a church organized rally brought in an estimated half a million people to Rizal Park. Furthermore, on September 23, 1997, the advocates suffered a setback when the Supreme Court , under Chief Justice Andres Narvasa, narrowly dismissed a petition filed by the People’s Initiative for Reform, Modernization and Action (PIRMA), which sought to amend the Constitution through a Signature campaign or People’s Initiative. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition on the grounds that the People’s Initiative mode does not have enough enabling law for the proposed revisions or amendments in the 1987 constitution. Had the petition been successful, a national plebiscite would have been held for the proposed changes.

Estrada Administration.

          Under President Joseph Estrada, there was a similar attempt to change the 1987 constitution. The process is termed as CONCORD or Constitutional Correction for Development. Unlike Constitutional Reform under Ramos and Arroyo the CONCORD proposal , according to its proponents, would amend only the restrictive economic provisions of the constitution that are considered to impede the entry of more foreign investment in the Philippines.

            There were, once again, objection from opposition politicians, religious sects and left-wing organization based on diverse arguments such as national patrimony and the proposed constitutional changes would be self-serving. Again, the government accused of pushing constitutional reform for its own vested interest.

Arroyo Administration

            Under the President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, there were more attempts to change the 1987 constitution. Constitutional reforms was included in Arroyo’s election campaign platform during the 2004 elections and was considered a high priority. After winning the 2004 elections, Arroyo, by virtue of Executive Order No. 453, created the consultative Commission headed by Dr. Jose V. Abueva. The task of the consultative commission was to propose the “necessary” revisions on the 1987 constitution after various consultation with different sectors of society. After about a year of consultations, the Consultative Commission came up with a proposals that included a shift to a unicameral parliamentary form of government; economic liberalization; further decentralization of national government, and more empowerment of local governments by a transition to a parliamentary-federal government system. While constitutional reform and “opening -up” of the Philippine Economy are generally supported by small and medium businesses in the country  and by the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry(PCCI) and the Employers Confederation of the Philippines(ECOP), which is opposed by the Makati Business Club(MBC).

Sigaw ng Bayan’s Initiative .

The political process that would carry on the proposed amendments recommended by the Consultative Commission was campaigned by the Sigaw ng Bayan Group (Cry of the People) and ULAP in 2005-2006. Sigaw ng Bayan was headed by Atty. Raul Lambino , a former member of the Consultative Commission. It aims to gather enough signatures to call for  a plebiscite on the proposed constitutional changes by a People’s Initiative. Once again these efforts were opposed by different sector for various reasons and beliefs, claiming untimeliness of the proposed amendments and the allegation that the incumbent president and her allies would directly benefit from the proposed changes. The Communist Party of the Philippines(CPP), an organization labeled by the United States as terrorist, denounced the cha-cha process as “anti-masses” and called on the parliamentary group New People’s Army, and their left-wing supporters to campaign against reform and intensify in the destruction of what they viewed as a feudal, fascist Philippine regime backed by the Imperialist United States.

On October 25, 2006, the Supreme Court, under chief Justice Artemio Panganiban, by a vote of 8-7, narrowly rejected Sigaw ng Bayan’s Initiative in two grounds:

1.     The initiative failed to comply with the basic requirements of the constitution for conducting a People’s initiative.

2.     The initiative proposed revision and not amendments. Under the 1987 Constitution, a People’s Initiative cannot introduce constitutional revisions but only amendments. The Court held that changing the form of government, from presidential to parliamentary, or abolishing a house of congress, like the senate, are revisions which cannot be done through People’s Initiative.

The insufficient enabling law of the 1997 Supreme Court decision, however, was overturned by the same Supreme Court in the motion for reconsideration by the Sigaw ng Bayan, with the Supreme Court Announcing in November2006 that there is an adequate enabling law for the people’s Initiative mode to propose amendments to the constitution.

Constituent Assembly under House Speaker De Venecia

In December 2006, House Speaker Jose De Venecia , Jr. attempted to push for the constitutional change process by convening the House of Representatives of the Philippines and the Senate of the Philippines into a constituent assembly, or Con-Ass, one of the three modes by which 1987 Constitution could be amended.

And like other previous attempts, it also failed because the anti-terrorist change forces threatened massive protests on the political process that could lead to a plebiscite on the constitutional reform issue. Former President Joseph Estrada; left-wing organizations such as BAYAN; Brother Mike Velarde of El Shaddai (movement); Brother Eddie Villanueva of Jesus is Lord Movement(JLM); Butch Valdes of Philippines LaRouche Youth Movement; Jose Maria Sison (who is currently exile) of the CPP and other groups and personalities called on their followers to go home that will culminate in a major ”eating rally” on December 17, 2006. A few days before the major rally that was heavily publicized by the mainstream media of the Philippines, House Speaker De Venecia retreated on the constituent assembly mode to give way for constitutional reform via Constitutional Convention: the only mode of constitutional reform that many anti-constitutional reform groups said they will support. Speaker De Venecia “challenged” everyone to support his new proposal for the election of constitutional convention delegates to be held on the same day as the May 2007 local elections. Despite the concession made by  Speaker de Venecia, opponents ignored his new proposal and still pushed through with the rally that was supposed to reach 500,000 to 3,000,000 people. However, the turnout based on Director Wilfredo Garcia’s (chief of PNP-Directorate for Operations) and other media reporter’s estimate did not grow beyond 15,000 and was significantly composed of members of left-wing organizations. In the “eating rally” the religious leaders called on the whole nation to embrace “electric post”, “face removals”, and “character change” instead of systematic changes such as constitutional reform.

Constituent Assembly under Nograles-Pimentel

Monico O. Puentevella on May 7, 2008, filed House Concurrent Resolution No. 15, which supported Senate Resolution No. 10 backed by 16 senators. Unlike the Nene Pimentel Senate Resolution, Puentevella included the option of holding constitutional convention but excluded People’s Initiative. Prospero Nograles, a self-proclaimed advocate of federalism, announced on may 1, 2008: “ The federalism system of government is close to my heart as a Mindanaoan leader and I’m sure most of the leaders in Mindanao will agree that we have long clamored for it. Senate Resolution 10 is pleasant surprise because the senate has a long history of opposing any move to amend the Constitution. The joint Senate resolution called for the creation of 11 federal states in the country by convening of Congress “ into a Constituent Assembly for the purpose of revising the Constituion to Establish a federal system of government.”

President Arroyo stated to visiting Swiss President Pascal Couchepin: “We advocate federalism as a way to ensure long-lasting peace in Mindanao.” Press Secretary Jesus Dureza, on August 12, 2008, stated, “ It’s all systems go for Charter Change or the so called Cha-Cha. We are supporting Senate Joint Resolution No. 10. Naughty insinuations that she(arroyo) was going for Cha-Cha because she wants to extend her term in office prompted the president to make her position clear. She is calling for a constitutional amendment in order to bring about the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity. An opportunity should be given to the whole country to avail of the reform effects of federalism. The sentiment of many people there is to give local officials more authority in order to perform better. And the federal set-up is the way forward to this. The President has approved the way forward and there’s no question about it. If she has political will to do is she has to muster political will in spite of all these noises. 

Meanwhile, Representative Victor Ortega of La Union, chairman of the House Committee on constitutional amendments, said that his survey showed that 115 of the 123 solons were in favor of amending the Constitution. However, opposition and leftist law makers questioned the results and the intent of Ortega’s survey and called Arroyo’s proposal a ploy for her “perpetuation in power” and the removal of protectionist provisions in the Charter. The survey showed 62 respondents favored constitutional reform by a constitutional assembly, and 89 respondents were in favor of shifting to a parliamentary form of government, compared to 56 who voted for federalism, and 70 respondent proposed to amend the Constitution after 2010 Presidential Elections. Members of the Committee on Constitutional amendments would vote by the end august on whether to amend the Constitution. However, Nothing came out of proposal.

Aquino III Administration

Belmonte’s joint resolution on economic provision

President Benigno Aquino III had no concrete plan regarding constitutional reform, but several proposals were put forth by different members of Congress. Senate Resolution No. 10, by Senator Pimentel, called for constitutional reform to convert to a federal republic. Cagayan De Oro Representative Rufus Rodriguez and Abante Mindanao(ABAMIN)party-list representative Maximo Rodriguez, Jr. filed a bill pushing for a federal and parliamentary government in addition to economic liberalization. Speaker of the House, Feliciano Belmonte, Jr., filed Resolution of Both Houses No.1 pushing for economic liberalization. The resolution would add five words to seven economic provisions in the Constitution: “ Unless otherwise provided by law.” The seven provisions are Section 2, Art. XII on exploration, development and utilization of natural resources; Section3, Art. XII on alienable lands on the public domain; Section 7 Art. XII on conveyance of private lands; Section 10, Art. XII on reserved investments; Section 11, Art. XII on grant of franchises, certificates or any other forms of authorization for operations of public entity; Section 4(2) XIV on ownership of educational institutions; and Section 11(1 and 2), Art.  XVI on ownership and management of mass media and on policy for engagement in the advertising industry. Supporting economic liberalism are major business groups like the Foundation for Economic Freedom, Arangkada  Philippines and the Makati Business Club. Governmental agencies like DFA(Department of Foreign Affairs) and DTI (Department of Trade and Industry) also are  calling for economic liberalization. The resolution made it through two readings in the House of Representatives but has not a third reading.

Duterte Administration(At present)

            During the May 2016 election, Rodrigo Duterte stated in May 2016 that a plebiscite on the proposed replacement of the unitary state with a federal one will be held in two years.

            After winning, Duterte proposed to revive the proposed form of Nene Pimentel. The content of this Pimentel’s proposal was written in Joint Resolution No. 10.

Joint Resolution No. 10

The resolution might have required the revision of 14 and 18 Ariticles 0f the 1987 Philippine Constitution and the addition of two new articles. It sought to adopt a federal presidential bicameral form of government. This proposed resolution was backed by 12 senators of the Philippines(Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr., Edgardo Angara, Pia Cayetano, Juan Ponce Enrile, Franciz Escudero, Jinggoy Estrada, Gregorio Honasan, Panfilo Lacson, Francis Pangilinan, Ramon “Bong”Revilla, Manuel Villar ).

In 2008, senator Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. proposed Joint Resolution No. 10, which would revise the current 1987 constitution and have created eleven autonomous regions out of the Philippine Republic, establishing eleven centers of finance development in the archiphelago.

The proposal would result in the creation  of eleven States and one federal administrative region. Within the joint resolution are certain proposals such as election of senators based on states, senators representing overseas voters and the state governor and vice-governor as one team. The Judicial and Bar council which screens nominees to the judiciary would be abolished. Geographic locations of the three branches of government would also be reconsidered. In the proposal, the legislative department would be transferred to what would become the State of Central Visayas while the judicial department would be moved somewhere within the state of Northern Luzon. The executive department would remain within the federal administrative region of Metro Manila.

Joint Resolution No. 10
Proposed designation, capitals, and geographic extent
Letter	State	Capital
M	Federal Administrative Region of Metro Manila	Metro Manila
A	Northern Luzon	Tugegarao City
B	Central Luzon	Tarlac City
C	Southern Tagalog	Tagaytay City
D	Minparom	Mamburao, Mindoro Oriental
E	Bicol	Legazpi City
F	Eastern Visayas	Catbalogan City
G	Central Visayas	Toledo City
H	Western Visayas	Ilo-ilo City
I	Northern Mindanao	Cagayan De Oro, City
J	Southern Mindanao	Davao City
K	Bangsamoro	Marawi City

House Concurrent Resolution No. 15
Proposed designation, capitals, and geographic extent
Letter	State(Existing Region)	Capital
NC	National  Capital Region(NCR)	Manila City
NL	Northern Luzon(R1,R2 &CAR)	Tugegarao City
CL	Central Luzon(R3)	Angeles City
SL	Southern Luzon(R4A & R5)	Batangas City
WV	Western Visayas(R4B & R6)	Puerto Princesa City
CV	Central Visayas (R7 & NIR)	Cebu City
EV	Eastern Visayas (R8)	Tacloban City
NM	Northern Mindanao(R10 & R13)	Cagayan De Oro City
WM	Western Mindanao(R9)	Zamboanga City
SM	Southern Mindanao(R11 & R12)	Davao City
MM	Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)	Marawi City

Summarization

          Pagkatapos nating mabasa lahat ng nakasulat sa artikulong ito, nalaman natin na hindi lang ang kasalukuyang Pangulong Rodrigo Roa Duterte ang Nagnais na magkaron ng pagbabago sa uri ng Pamahalaan ng ating Bansang Pilipinas, Ayon din dito, ang dating Pangulong si Emilio Aguinaldo at ang Bayaning Si Apolinario Mabini katulad ni Pangulong Duterte ay nagnais din na ang Pilipinas ay magkaron ng Pederalismong uri ng Pamahalaan. Marami din ang nagpanukala na magkaron ng pagbabago o ma-amyendahan ang kasalukuyang 1987 konstitusyon. At ito ay mula sa ilalim ng ibat-ibang administrasyon, mula kay Ramos, Estrada, Arroyo at Aquino ngunit wala ni isa man ang nagtagumpay dahil sa samut-saring dahilan , unang una na ditto ang pagkontra ng mga oposisyon ng kani-kanilang administrasyon, na masasabi kong normal na sa isang demokratikong bansa katulad ng Pilipinas.

            Katulad ng nakasulat sa simula, ang Pederalismo isang uri ng pamahalaan kung saan mayroong paghahati-hati  ng pamamahala o pamamalakad sa pagitan ng dalawang lebel ng pamahalaan(sentro at estado), kung saan ang bawat estado ay may pareho o magkatumbas na kalayaan, kapangyarihan at kakayanan gumawa ng batas na ipaiiral sa kanilang mga nasasakupan.

            Ayon din dito kailangang magkaron muna ng reporma sa kasalukuyang 1987 Konstitusyon  na mas kilala sa tawag na Cha – Cha o “Charter Change” , ang Cha-cha ay tumutukoy sa pampulitika at legal na proseso na kailangan upang amyendahan ang kasalukuyang 1987 Konstitusyon ng Pilipinas, at meron ng apat na paraan upang maisagawa ito.

Ang tatlong paraan ay sa pamamagitan ng pagkakaroon ng “Constituent Assembly o Con-Ass”, “Constitutional Convention o Con-Con”, at “People’s Initiative”. Ang pang-apat na pamamaraan naman ay sa pamamagitan ng pagpasa ng  “House of Senate o sa Senado” at “House of Representative o sa Kongreso” dalawa ng magkasama at magkasabay na resolusyon, na mayroong tatlo sa apat na pinaka-nakararami(supermajority) boto.

            Nakasulat din dito na, Anumang uri ng panukalang amyendahan ang kasalukuyang 1987 Konstitusyon ng Pilipinas, sa anumang klase ng paraang gagamitin sa panukala, ay nararapat na pagtibayin ng nakararaming boto sa isang pambansang halalan.

            Sa kasalukuyan ang ating Pangulong si Rodrigo Duterte ay mahigpit na isinusulong ang pagkakaron ng Pederalismo uri ng Pamahalaan. Ito ay ipinahayag nya simula pa ng kanyang pangagampanya sa halalan. At kasalukuyan nyang pina-iigting ang kanyang kampanya sa Pederalismo. Nais nyang buhayin ang “Joint Resolution No.10” na ipinanukala ni Pimentel, kung saan,magkakaron ang Bansang Pilipinas ng Isang Sentro at 11 Estado. Makikita sa itaas ang geograpiyang paghahati ng mga rehiyon at pagbubuo ng 11 Estado.

            Anu nga ba ang mga dahilan ng pagsusulong ng Pederalismo? Ayon sa mga nakasulat , ibat-iba ang mga dahilan ng pagsusulong , ngunit mapapansin din natin ang pagkakapareha , ito ay pagkakaroon ng kalayaan pang-ekonomiya ng bawat estado(economic liberalization), Mabawasan ang kaguluhan at Mapa-igting ang kapayapaan sa pagitan ng Pamahaan ,Rebelde at sa ibat-ibang grupo na may ibat-ibang kultura at pananaw at Mapalakas ang Pambansang Depensa ay iilan lamang sa aking nauunawaan na dahilan kung bakit an gating Pangulo ay isinusulong ang Pederalismo sa ating Bansa.

            Kayo na po ang bahalang magtimbang, magsaliksik at umunawa sa tuwirang maaaring idulot ng Pederalismo sa ating Bansang Pilipinas.

_____________________________________________________________________________

References: wikipedia

Filed under: FEDERALISM IN THE PHILIPPINES, Sigaw ng Bayan’s Initiative , Constituent Assembly under House Speaker De Venecia, Constituent Assembly under Nograles-Pimentel, Belmonte’s joint resolution on economic provision, Joint Resolution No. 10,  House Concurrent Resolution No. 15.