Download - Federalism in the Philippines
FEDERALISM IN THE PHILIPPINES
Why Adopt a Federal Form of Government and Steps for Transition
Acosta, Mabelle E.
Du, Kelvin John M.
Tongo, Karmela
Legal Research
LLB I-Estrellado
College of Law
Ateneo De Davao University
November 18, 2013
2
Introduction
The Republic of the Philippines has a presidential-unitary form of government
which is highly centralized. This means that the country is led by the President as the
head of state and the government. He has general supervision over local governments
which are dependent on the national government as the Constitution has concentrated
political powers and authority in the national government. Being an archipelago of 7,107
islands it h
as been a struggle to deliver and provide services to the public especially to
those remote areas. The 1987 Constitution 1987 Constitution provided for an answer in
the form of decentralization of government administration including the creation of the
autonomous region. This strategy is said to facilitate faster delivery of needed basic
services and promote participatory governance. The Local Government Code of 1991
which has been functioning for over 2 decades now is one of the legislations and
strategies enacted and introduced to further local autonomy and promote good
governance
It must be noted however, that the extent of decentralization through local and
regional autonomy is limited. The Local Government Code despite of its goal to provide
autonomy to these Local Government Units in terms of providing services and providing
legislation to their place is still under the supervision of the legislature and the
executive. It is still subject to national government intervention. With very limited powers
and authority and inadequate resources, most of the local governments cannot provide
the public services that their constituents need. Local dependence on the national
government stifles local initiative and resourcefulness, and hampers local business and
development. With most leaders reluctant to decentralize the powers of the national
government because it enhances their control over local communities, the efforts to
promote local autonomy since the 1950s seemed have reached a dead end.
With the current form of government, the government and leaders have
generally failed to effectively address problems-continuing underdevelopment,
poverty, social inequality, unemployment, and the inadequate social services in the
country.
3
For these reasons, the federalist movement seeks to change the highly
centralized unitary structure to a decentralized structure of autonomous local
governments leading to a federal system. Advocates of federalism believe that the
structure of the federal system would respond to the geographical obstacle and
differences caused by cultural diversity on governance because it allows fragmentation
while at the same time promoting national interest.
In this respect, this paper will answer the question “would changing our traditional
unitary Republic to the Federal Republic of the Philippines the right choice?” The first
section of the paper provides an historical background of the Philippine government.
The second section provides for an overview decentralization and federalism in the
Philippines. The third section provides the context of decentralization in the Philippines.
The case of the Bangsamoro in ARMM is also discussed under the Local Government
Code. The fourth section discusses federalism as the right form of government needed
in the Philippines. The last section discusses the proposed process in adopting a
federal structure of government.
4
Overview and Historical Background
The Philippines is an archipelago stretching 1 839 km north-to-south off the
southeast coast of Asia. It is composed of 7, 107 islands divided into three major island
groups namely Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao with the total population 92,337,852 as
of May, 2010.1 The diverse and numerous ethnic and tribal groups in the country can be
attributed to its geographical features. The people on each big island or group of islands
speak their own dialect, follows a culture that is distinct only among them.
Early Filipinos lived in numerous independent communities called barangays
under various native rules which were largely customary and unwritten. Even before the
arrival of Spaniards in the Philippines, autonomy among local units and communities are
already in existence. Under the Spanish regime, the civil and religious authorities of
Spain created a hierarchical form of administrative structure between the central
government and indigenous barangays all over the country with the exception of the
communities in Sulu and Mindanao. Due to these local‟s strong resistance, the
Spaniards failed to integrate their communities under the Spanish colonial regime.2
This system of government in the Philippines rooted in the colonial administration
of Spain has been maintained through the various political periods undergone by the
country. However, the degree of central government control has been changing. Trends
in both political and administrative decentralization have been influenced by threats to
national security, personalities of the presidents, national integration, national
development, and the perception of the central government on the competence of local
government.3
When the Spain ceded the Philippines to the United States, the latter essentially
maintained the administrative structure established by the former with special
arrangements with the Moros and non-Christian tribes. The Americans first organized a
military government with the consolidation of executive, legislative, and judicial authority
1 Philippines in Figures: Population, National Statistics Office, date retrieved: November 17, 2013. Retrieved from:
www.census.gov.ph. 2 T. Agoncillo & M. Guerrero, History of the Filipino People (4th ed., 1973) pp. 46-47.
3 Sosmena, 1987 as cited in Manasan, 1992. Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations, Fiscal Federalism, and Economic Development
in the Philippines working Paper series No. 92-04.
5
in the military governor. In spite of the enactment of policies purportedly supportive of
local autonomy, the Americans maintained a highly centralized politico-administrative
structure.4
The inauguration of the Philippine Republic on July 4, 1946 marked the
culmination of the Filipinos‟ 300 years of struggle for freedom. The 1935 Constitution
served as the fundamental law with the executive power being vested in the President,
the legislative power in the bicameral Congress of the Philippines and the judicial power
in the Supreme Court and inferior courts established by law.
During Marcos regime, the 1973 Constitution established a parliamentary form of
government and introduced the merger of executive and legislative powers. Marcos
abolished Congress and then went on to suspend national and local elections,
abrogating unto himself the power to appoint local officials .Although elections for a
national legislature were later held in 1978, and then for local officials in 1980, these
were never considered truly reflective of the people‟s will because of the prevailing
conditions of.5 Decentralization suffered a setback with the concentration of decision
making powers during the Marcos regime.
The overthrow of Marcos in 1986 and the ascent of Corazon Aquino into power
lead the promulgation of the Freedom Constitution which was to be in force pending the
adoption of a new constitution. A year later, the 1987 Constitution was ratified at a
plebiscite held on February 2, 1987.
The 1987 constitution has been in effect for the past 26 years and as the basic
and paramount law of the land, all other laws must conform and to which all persons
including the highest officials of the land, must defer. No act shall be valid if it conflicts
with the constitution.
4 I. Cruz. Philippine Political Law. 2002.
5 Brillantes, 1990 as cited in Manasan, 1992. Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations, Fiscal Federalism, and Economic Development
in the Philippines working Paper series No. 92-04.
6
Unitary System versus Federal Government
As we are for the Federal form of government in our country it should be
understood first how our society works in terms of our current form of government which
is Unitary and how it would work when we are finally in a Federal form of government.
Unitary form of government is defined as a system of political organization in
which most or all of the governing power resides in a centralized government. It
contrasts with a federal system
In a unitary system the central government commonly delegates authority to
subnational units and channels policy decisions down to them for implementation. A
majority of nation-states are unitary systems. They vary greatly. Great Britain, for
example, decentralizes power in practice though not in constitutional principle. Others
grant varying degrees of autonomy to subnational units.6
A unitary system of government, therefore, is one where all of the government
authority and power is vested with one central government. This central government
has the sovereign power and the power of controlling its delegation of function to other
local or regional units.7 The extent of the authority given to the subunits or local
governments differ per country and depends on a variety of factors, foremost is the
stipulations in a Constitution and implementing laws thereof. Some of the notable
nations having a unitary system of government are the United Kingdom and France.
The Philippines falls on the later part of the sentence since it gives autonomy
through its local government units. Furthermore The Philippines has a democratic form
of government pursuant to Section 1, Article II of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines
which states that “The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty
resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.” Our country
“is a republic with a presidential form of government wherein power is equally divided
among its three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. One basic corollary in a
6 Unitary. 2013 In Enyclopedia britannica.com. Retrieved Nov, 12, 2013, from http://global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/
615371/unitary-system. 7 Unitary Government, 2013 in USLegal.com. Retrieved November 9, 2013, from http://definitions.uslegal.com/u/unitary-
government/
7
presidential system of government is the principle of separation of powers wherein
legislation belongs to Congress, execution to the Executive, and settlement of legal
controversies to the Judiciary.”8
Whereas, Federalism is defined as a form of government in which political
authority is divided between a general or national government and regional (or “state”)
governments. The general government carries on the military and diplomatic functions
of the country and deals with many other matters of national concern. The state or
regional governments carry on the public activities that most directly affect the citizens,
such as police and fire protection. In a federal political structure, the state governments
are not mere provincial agencies of a central government. For under federalism, the
state or regional governments have their own constitutional powers that the general
government must recognize and respect. On the other hand, the state governments in a
federal system have less independence than do states that are members of a
confederation or league. 9
Unlike the unitary system of government, the principle of federalism centers on
the allocation of the government authority and power to both the central or national
government and the local, regional or state governments. In a federal system, there are
powers exclusively exercised by either the central government or the local government
units. Nonetheless, there are still some government powers and functions that are
shared by both governments, especially those that require utmost consideration such as
those relating to the right of life and liberty.10
There are also many countries in the world which has a federal government. The
United States of America is the best example of a nation enforcing federalism as the
concept itself is closely tied with the governmental system of the United States. Other
countries include Switzerland, Malaysia, Pakistan and Mexico.
8 The Official Gazette of the Philippines, date retrieved November 9 2013 http://www.gov.ph/about/gov/.
9 James McClellan, Liberty, Order, and Justice: An Introduction to the Constitutional Principles of American Government [1989]
date retrieved: November 8 2013 retrieved from: http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle
=679&chapter=68462&layout=html&Itemid=27 source 10
Federalism, 2013 in The Free Dictionary by Farlex. Retrieved November 9, 2013, from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.
com/Federalism
8
Autonomy and Decentralization
While a unitary form of government means having one central government, this
does not ipso facto mean that there is total abolishment of local autonomy and
decentralization. Although federalism already implies decentralization, unitary systems
may also decentralize.
Decentralization is the delegation of the national government of certain authority
to local and regional governments. Local governments are then allowed to do decision-
making on their own within their given area wherein they exercise authority.
Decentralization is a necessary prerequisite of autonomy.11
In the case of Ganzon vs. Court of Appeals12, 200 SCRA 271, it was questioned
whether the constitutional change in the wording of the 1987 Philippine Constitution
meant that it divested the power of control of the President, and likewise the legislative
branch, over the local officials of the local government units (LGUs) which have been
awarded autonomy by the same Constitution. The Court ruled that autonomy, in the use
of the word in the Constitution, does not mean that the local governments are
considered as states similar to the federal government of the United States. What the
inclusion of local autonomy simply means is the creation of less dependent LGUs.
These local governments are still subject to the laws and restrictions enacted by the
legislative department and supervision of the executive department. Although LGUs are
given autonomy, they cannot be considered as independent bodies of the government;
they are not “mini-states” or states in the same light as that in a federal government
precisely because they are created through the enactments of the Congress.
In addition, the Court ruled in Ganzon that the provision on local autonomy is
found under Article II of the 1987 Constitution. These principles and state policies have
been held in a long line of cases to not be self-executing. This means that in
expounding on how local autonomy will be applied in the system of government, there
must still be an enabling law created by the legislature. This includes the passage of a
local government code which will define the nature and functions of the local
11
Disomangcop vs. Secretary, G.R. No. 149848 (November 25, 2004), 444 SCRA 203. 12
Ganzon vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 93252, 93746, 95245 (August 5, 1991), 200 SCRA 271, 281.
9
government units, putting into concrete terms the extent of the local autonomy
contemplated in the Constitution.
What is explicit in the 1987 Philippine Constitution is the integration of the
principle of autonomy of local and regional government units into the unitary system of
government. In effect, it provided for the decentralization of administration of the
country- and not the delegation of the actual power of the state which is still within one
central government.
Decentralization in the Philippines
The Republic of the Philippines has a presidential-unitary form of government.
This means that the country is led by the President as the head of state and the
government. The Philippines is composed of one central government which is divided
into three main departments: the executive, the legislative and the judicial department.
Although there are three separate branches, they all co-exist in one government,
separated only to distribute the immense powers of the state in order to have checks
and balances.
Section 1, Article II of the 1987 Philippine Constitution states that: “The
Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and
all government authority emanates from them.” The Philippines believes in democracy-
that it is the people who have the real power and the power which the government has
is only derived from them. It also espouses a republican system of representation so
that the people are properly represented in the government which they have established
to support them.
Although the Philippines has a unitary government, there still exists a great deal
of autonomy and decentralization. Foremost is the state policy that local governments
be given autonomy.13 This is a new inclusion in the 1987 Constitution as it provided for
decentralization of government administration including the creation of the autonomous
regions. However, the Constitution still adopts a unitary government and not a federal
13
Section 25, Article II, The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines.
10
one.14
This state policy has been realized through the enactment of the Local
Government Code of 199115 which provided for a more apparent system of
decentralization in the government. It provided for clearer delineation of tasks which the
Local Government Units (LGUs) may undertake within their localities. However, it must
be noted that the extent of decentralization through local and regional autonomy is
limited. It has been even referred to as a “dead end” by its major proponent, Senator
Pimentel, because of the resistance from those used to a centralized structure of
government.16
This conflict between having a unitary form of government while upholding local
autonomy and decentralization gave rise to a movement for federalism in the
Philippines.
The 2005 Consultative Commission
Then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo created the 2005 Consultative
Commission during her incumbency as President of the Republic of the Philippines. The
commission, commonly referred to as the ConCom, was formed in order to study the
existing system of government in the Philippines as well as study the recommendations
for changes from a presidential-unitary system of government to a parliamentary-federal
one.17 The head of the commission was Jose Abueva, a known proponent for federalism
in the Philippines. Despite several controversies regarding the creation of the
commission, the members of the ConCom regularly convened and discussed the
possible shift of the form of government which resulted to their recommendation which
was submitted to Congress. The most significant parts of their recommendations are the
shift to a federal form of government, a parliamentary type of government, and the
14
Ganzon vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 93252, 93746, 95245 (August 5, 1991), 200 SCRA 271, 281. 15
Republic Act No. 7160, effective January 1, 1992. 16
2005 Consultative Commission Session 3, Oct 3, 2005. Transcript of the proceedings, p.17. Date retrieved: November 5, 2013.
Retrieved from: http://pcij.org/blog/wp-docs/chacha/Session03_T00305p.pdf. 17
Executive Order No. 453 (2005), retrieved from the Official Gazette of the Philippines.
11
extension of the term of public officials, including the President, for transition.18 They
also submitted a recommendation of amendments to the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
Much of the deliberations of the ConCom centered on how federalism is
advantageous to the Philippines vis-a-vis the current autonomy exercised by local
government units. In the transcript of the meetings of the Consultative Commission,
Chairman Abueva discussed the division of functions they envisioned between the
national and state governments are more than just local autonomy. It is the delineation
of important powers of administration to the regional or state governments for better
execution. Those that will be left to the national level are only the functions which a state
may not undertake on its own and those of national interest such as security and
defense, territory, foreign and diplomatic relations, immigration and citizenship, and
economic or banking systems.19
Although we agree on the shift to federalism, the same cannot be said as to the
suggested change from a presidential to a parliamentary type of government. An
attempt to change the type of government was done by the late President Ferdinand
Marcos during his extended term.20 This pseudo-parliamentary21 system however was
not well-received, having been done during the regime of martial law in the Philippines.
It has also been criticized that the parliamentary government was not in effect since it
was still Marcos who was in power even for tasks delegated to the Prime Minister.
As to the extension of the term of the President, among other high-ranking
officials, the reason behind this was that it would help facilitate the change in the form of
government. While this guided reason may be true, it was received negatively by the
public especially since the current President at that time was not perceived in the best
light by the people. Even with a change in presidency, extending the term of the
18
Ronald J. May, (2007) Federalism versus Autonomy Debate and practice in the Philippines, date retrieved: November 4 2013,
retrieved from http://www.iag.org.ph/index.php/blog/444-federalism-versus-autonomy-debate-and-practice-in-the-philippines 19
2005 Consultative Commission Session 3, Oct 3, 2005. Transcript of the proceedings, p.17. Date retrieved: November 5, 2013.
Retrieved from: http://pcij.org/blog/wp-docs/chacha/Session03_T00305p.pdf 20
Marcos Administration, in Philippinecountry,com. Date retrieved: November 11, 2013. Retrieved from: http://www.philippine
country.com/philippine_history/marcos_time.html 21
Jose V. Abueva, Why Change our Presidential Government to a Parliamentary Government?, date retrieved: November 11,
2013. Retrieved from: http://pcij.org/blog/wp-docs/JoseAbueva_Why_change_to_a_parliamentary_government.pdf
12
President for the transition to a federal government will still encounter doubts since the
current Philippine Constitution itself provides that the term of the President shall not
exceed six years. An amendment to this provision, although an easy solution, might
prove to be futile depending on how well the public admits the current administration. If
it is possible to do away with extending the terms of office of incumbent high-ranking
officials, then it would be more beneficial to the transition so as to minimize questions
on the purpose of the conversion to federalism.
Federalism in the Philippines
Although the incorporation of federalism will not solve all of the problems the
Philippines is facing, it will be a chance to tidy up all loopholes and erroneous functions
found within the current system.
The following is a summary22 of the key advantages the Philippines will arrive at
if it will pursue a federal form of government:
1. A federal system will allow for a more peaceful and enduring framework in the
negotiations with the Bangsamoro and the Muslim Filipinos as they will be given
ample room to establish their state as well as the laws which they deem fit in
accordance with their culture and interests. This will give way for the cession of
peace and order problems in Mindanao, especially to the cities and provinces
under the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).
2. The creation of around a dozen states instead of 80 or so provinces will enable
for faster and easier development in terms of industries, economies, and
integration.
3. Federalism will push for better political participation from the citizens since
22
From: The Annotated CMFP Draft Constitution (2005) by Jose Abueva, as cited in Ronald J. May, (2007) Federalism versus
Autonomy: Debate and Practice in the Philippines; Pimentel, Aquilino, Why Adopt the Federal System of Government? A Primer
on the Federal System presented to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines at its annual convention, Tacloban City, 27 April 2002;
Abueva, Jose, Towards a Federal republic of the Philippines with a Parliamentary Government by 2010 in “Towards a Federal
Republic of the Philippines with a Parliamentary Government by 2010: A Draft Constitution”, Kalayaan College, Marikina City,
2002, pp. 5-6, as cited in Brillantes and Mossacre: Decentralization and Federalism in the Philippines: Lesson from the Global
Community.
13
they will not only be governed by the national government but also by their
respective state. Election of public official in the state level will be improved as
the citizens have more direct stake in the outcome thereof. Citizens will be more
involved and mindful of their state government.
4. Governance will be improved in the state or local levels. Public officials may be
more rigorously checked in their activities which will lead to less corruption and
more accountability. If it will be evident that corruption has rapidly reduced, more
citizens will be willing to pay for taxes which will yield to more much-needed
budget and funds for the national and state governments.
5. Federalism will promote interstate competition which in effect will improve the
country‟s development. Economic development will be spread out across states
and will not be focused on the capital. States will improve on their local products
in order to bring in foreign as well as domestic investment. Progression will be
apparent and will help bring in and retain professionals.
6. Similar to the United States, each state may have more flexibility in the
creation and implementation of laws within its own state. Although already
implemented through the Local Government Code of 1991, the creation of a law
instead of an ordinance will allow for more profound application and stricter
execution.
7. Each state may concentrate on addressing internal problems as these differ
from state to state. Its resources will be directed to its actual issues and not
merely for the improvement of the capital state. Current underdeveloped cities
and provinces will have more room to use their resources towards their own
progression. The national or federal government will then be less burdened in
unifying efforts on problems only specific to a state, enabling it to concentrate
more on national issues on security and globalization.
8. A federal system will also help preserve a region or locality‟s cultures and
tradition. Each state will be more inclined to have their own identity to
differentiate themselves from other states. This will give effect to a more state-
centric attitude for citizens, enriching the local language and culture. This does
14
not however mean a decrease in the national unity but instead will give rise to
cultural diversity and social plurality which will benefit the nation.
9. The shift to federalism will strengthen the people‟s value of democracy,
creating a deeper attachment between the people and their local government.
Citizens will come to realize the value of their participation in the formation of the
state.
Federalism: In Politics
The concept of federalism points mainly to the ideal of giving full autonomy to the
State giving them their own constitution and give limits to the national government on
what it would impose on the state and vice versa. It aims to decentralize the form of
power, the distribution of goods and that the ordinances to be enacted are grounded on
the actual tradition and customs of the people without having fear of violating the
constitution.
In the Philippines all of the laws that will be enacted should adhere to the
'mother of laws' the 1987 Philippines Constitution which took effect on February 2, 1987.
The 1987 Philippines Constitution was enacted after the oust of then President
Ferdinand Marcos who held power for 21 years and had assume the role of being the
legislative body and the executive body after his declaration of Martial Law. This
constitution was created with the aim of avoiding as much as possible another martial
law and any form of abuse of power on whoever will assume it which has been proven
to be detrimental for the country's state in terms of not only in legislation but also of
human rights and justice. Therefore it follows the hierarchy of laws to which every
statutes promulgated by legislative bodies or administrative bodies should adhere to.
The bottom part of the hierarchy is the ordinances enacted by the Local Government
Units (LGU). As LGU has been given 'meaningful and genuine' local autonomy these
ordinances should still adhere to administrative issuances by the executive. Then these
issuances should be pursuant to the statutes or laws enacted by the legislative
department of our country then finally all of these should be pursuant to the 1987
Constitution of the Philippines.
15
Our 1987 constitution paved way for the creation of the Autonomous Region of
Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) and the creation of the Cordillera of Autonomous Region
(CAR) provided that the congress will create an organic act for each region. However
this organic act has not been materialized which would be discussed in the latter part of
this paper.
Also another good feature in our 1987 Constitution is that it provided local
autonomy to the local government units. Meaning, it can enact laws on its own. It can be
similar to the concept of Federalism where the states are given full autonomy in terms of
creating policies, laws and as well as the distribution of their goods. Having the same
concept as that of a Federal form of government why is it still a need for changing the
constitution to Federal government? What is the difference between Local Government
Code that was enacted pursuant to the 1987 Philippines Constitution and that of
Federalism?
Local Government Code
The idea of decentralization is not new in our country. It has been existent before
the enactment of the Local Government Code. We already had acts that aim for
decentralization of power such as the Local Autonomy Act and the Decentralization act
however it was directly supervised by the President and the governance remained
centralized. There were still actions for decentralization after those acts namely the
Martial Law constitution and the Local Government Code but was found to be ineffective
since it was not practiced.23
Article X of the 1897 Constitution states that the political and territorial
subdivisions shall enjoy local autonomy24 and these political and territorial subdivisions
has the power to create its own sources of revenues and to levy taxes, fees and
charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide,
consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy. Such taxes, fees, and charges shall
23
Ronald J. May, (2007) Federalism versus Autonomy Debate and practice in the Philippines, date retrieved: November 4 2013,
retrieved from http://www.iag.org.ph/index.php/blog/444-federalism-versus-autonomy-debate-and-practice-in-the-philippines.
24 Section 2, Aarticle X, The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines.
16
accrue exclusively to the local governments. 25 And that the President shall exercise
general supervision to these local governments ensuring that the acts of the component
units are within their prescribed powers and functions. 26 Moreover this mandated by
the constitution was strengthened through the enactment of the Local Government
Code 27
Republic Act 7610 otherwise known as The Local Government Code of 1991 was
enacted on October 10 1991 pursuant to the 1987 Constitution. In its Declaration of
policy its primary goal is to make the local government units as self-reliant thereby
giving them genuine and meaningful local autonomy. It also aims to make a responsive
and accountable government structure instituted through a system of decentralization
whereby local government units shall be given more powers, authority, responsibilities,
and resources. The process of decentralization shall proceed from the national
government to the local government units.28
The Local government Code also provides for the kind of power the local
government assume in relation to what National government may impose. Section 25,
Article 1 of Chapter III or the Intergovernmental Relations chapter of the code states that
the President shall exercise general supervision over local government units, aside from
that it has the authority of exercising directly supervising authorities over provinces,
highly urbanized cities, municipalities, cities and barangays. In terms of project
implementation coordination between the national and local government is needed to
ensure that the local government units have a participation in planning and
implementation of national projects.
Those mentioned among others are the role of the National government in the
Local government unit. As the Local Government Code's aim is to give 'meaningful and
genuine' autonomy to the Local Government Units, how far its goal could go? What its
autonomy in its constitutional sense?
The Supreme Court of the Philippines had the occasion to explain what
25
Section 5, Article X , The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. 26
Section 4, Article X, The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. 27
Section 3, Article X, The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. 28
“An Act Providing for Local Government Units”, Republic Act 7610, Declaration of policy, paragraph a (1991).
17
autonomy means. Autonomy in its constitutional sense has been defined not to make
mini states out of local government units, although it is not controlled by the legislature it
is still within their guidance. And still within the general supervision of the executive. 29
The involvement of the President in terms of the supervising this Local Government Unit
symbolizes somewhat direct intervention on what could possibly this local government
unit enact in terms of laws in the form of ordinances aside from his role of making sure
their adherence to the 1987 Philippines Constitution. Here, the Supreme Court had just
reiterated the Local Government Code that was enacted after jurisprudence was held.
Therefore both judiciary and statutes are consistent with its stand that Local
Government Code is not full autonomy at all.
Therefore our Local Government Code despite of its goal to provide autonomy to
these Local Government units in terms of providing service, providing legislation to their
place is still under the minimal supervision of the legislature and still 'under the general
supervision of the Executive'. It is still subject to the national government intervention
which is the opposite of Federalism which gives each state, the term for political
subdivision, their own constitution as mentioned above. In federalism there will be
liberation of laws as well as the increased responsibility of the leaders to come up with
activities which could help their constituent. Furthermore it allows the local
population to decide for their own on what ordinances which they think could benefit the
populace without seeking confirmation to the National government as long as it adheres
to the basic principles of the constitution of their place. It is to be remembere that the
laws enaceted by the National Government are of general scope unless provided by the
law itself therefore the considerations made pursuant to it are in the general sense.
Therefore, it might not concur with a place' unique system. It encourages the population
to enact laws in accordance with their traditions and customs.
Another thing that a Federal form of government may address better is the
system of corruption. In a unitary form of government which has a centralized form of
government, all the income of its regions will go to the National capital then will circulate
through the allocation of budget by the legislative department.The funds will be
29
Ganzon vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 93252, 93746, 95245 (August 5, 1991), 200 SCRA 271, 281.
18
managed by their representatives which are the legislators. The problem with that
especially in the Philippine context is that our political system has been long
problematic. Aside from the issue of political dynasties which means that one family
dominates the political set up of a particular place, Philippine politics highly involves
influence, power and connection. Regardless of the 'preferred' qualification, that is,
aside from what the constitutionally mandated qualification, anybody can be elected as
long as you have what it takes to win the votes—money and/or influence.
As what has been mentioned earlier these leaders or the politicians who has
been elected has the task of delivering to the people the allocation given by the national
government. The problem with it is that there are so many issues on how these
politicians allocate them. The issue of misuse of a public fund in fact has become an
open secret to the people. The most common example known may be some allotted
huge budget for road construction when in fact there is no road. The most recent issue
that has angered the whole nation is the issue of pork barrel system where some of the
legislators allegedly gave some of their budget to fake Non-Government Organizations
in return these budget will be returned to them in a form of commission. Not only
legislators but in the past, the former President of the Philippines has been plagued with
issues involving kickbacks30 using public funds. These funds were generated by either
collecting tax or by the efforts of the countries' districts through their production. In
return, sometimes, the place which produces more has received less not only through
lack of budget allocation but of the failure of the government leaders to effectively use
them in their own districts.This would have been minimized in a federal form of
government since the politicians can only rely on their own efforts in terms of budge. It
means when a state fails in giving the needs of their people but that they are capable in
production, it is the leaders of the place who has the sole responsibility and no longer
the national government through the budget allocation system.
Although the federal government cannot ensure to abolish the system of
corruption of the leaders but it will add more burden and responsibility to them as these
leaders will have no one to blame but them in handling the own funds of their place. It
30
What went before: the NBN ZTE Deal, date retrieved: November 16, 2013, retrieved from: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/
119639/what-went-before-the-nbn-zte-deal-2.
19
can possibly decrease and perhaps change the plagued system of handling funds, the
system of corruption which is probably inherent in our very own Unitary form of
government.
Another major issue that involves the need to shift from Federal form of
government is the longstanding conflict involving Moro Islamic Liberation Front, Moro
National Liberation Front and the Government of the Philippines. Although our
constitution has given the Bangsamoro their own autonomy there are still issues that
are deeply rooted that when addressed will be in conflict with our present 1987
constitution.
Case of the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)
Decentralization within a unitary form of government is limited. “It is inherently
reluctant to devolve political powers to its lower tiers while it may decentralize
administrative functions when required. This is the expected scenario in the case of the
Philippines in relation to the Muslim problem, more so because regional autonomy is
contained in the Constitution. But a long tradition of centralism has translated the
constitutional mandate into a toothless agency called ARMM.”31
Emergence of ARMM
The history of the ARMM has always been intertwined with the struggle of the
Muslim peoples of Mindanao towards self-rule and self-determination. These peoples,
who, now collectively call themselves “Bangsamoro” wanted to shape their own destiny
under Islamic law and culture. They had successfully resisted the influence of foreign
domination particularly the Spaniards, Japanese, and Americans however; their land
was nevertheless annexed into the Philippine government after the Americans gave
independence to the Philippines. And with the occurrence of social injustices and
unscrupulous acts of persons who took advantage of the people‟s low economic state
they are forced to rise in protest against the Philippine government.
31
S. Tanggol. 2010. "Regional Autonomy, Federalism and the Bangsamoro Issue.
20
On August 1, 1989, Republic Act No. 6734, otherwise known as the Organic Act
of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, was signed into law by then President
Corazon C. Aquino in pursuit of a vigorous approach to solve the Mindanao problem
through peace negotiations. A plebiscite was then conducted on November 17, 1989, in
the proposed areas of ARMM wherein the provinces of Maguindanao, Lanao del Sur,
Tawi-Tawi and Sulu opted to join the area of autonomy. When Pres. Gloria Macapagal
Arroyo assumed the Presidency on January 2001 after the ouster of President Joseph
E. Estrada, she sustains the peace and development efforts in Mindanao. As part of the
commitment to the 1996 Peace Agreement, she supported the September 2001
plebiscite for the ratification of Republic Act 9054, expanding the area of autonomy. The
ARMM is now comprised of the provinces of Maguindanao, Lanao del Sur, Sulu, Tawi-
Tawi, Basilan and the Islamic City of Marawi.32
Addressing the Demands for self-determination
Muslims did not want to be part of the Philippines as manifested in their petition
before the US Congress for separation and their continuing struggle for self-
determination. However, instead of giving the Moros self-determination, the central
government would just attempt to integrate them and, worse, infuse their ancestral
lands with resettlement projects for people from the north, changing the demography of
Mindanao and further marginalizing the Muslims, economically and politically.33
Continuing Poverty and Underdevelopment
The epic struggle of the Bangsamoro against foreign colonization then against
the Philippine Government at the onset of the 1970s left them impoverished and lagging
behind the rest of the country in all facets of development. They have become
dislocated and marginalized by war and unjust government policy. With poverty
incidence of 46.9%, ARMM has become the poorest among the 17regions in the country
32
Retrieved from: http://armm.gov.ph/, date retrieved: November 15, 2013. 33
S. Tanggol. 2010. "Regional Autonomy, Federalism and the Bangsamoro Issue.
21
with the province of Lanao del Sur posting the highest at 68.9% and Maguindanao at
57.8%. 34 In the Philippine Human Development Report of 2005, four of the five ARMM
provinces occupy the last four slots among the bottom ten provinces in the Human
Development Index Ranking.
One major factor that impedes the proper delivery of basic services, as well as
limits the capacities of LGUs, is the lack of “decentralization” within ARMM itself.
Although National Government Association‟s staffs were generally devolved to the
municipal level, in the ARMM they were devolved only to the regional level, and remain
under the control of the regional government. Since the regional government assumed
responsibility for devolved services, those services have not improved failed to improve
their constituency‟s quality of life.35
Limitations: ARMM
Autonomous Region as a Local Government and its Relationship to the National
Government
The discussion in Kida vs. Senate involved a premise and ruling that “[f]rom the
perspective of the Constitution, autonomous regions are considered one of the forms of
local governments, as evident from Article X of the Constitution entitled „Local
Government.” These Autonomous regions are established and discussed under
Sections 15 to 21 of said article. Furthermore the Supreme Court ruled that the
“autonomy granted to ARMM cannot be invoked to defeat national policies and
concerns.[It] cannot be used to exempt the region having to act in accordance with
national policy mandated by no less than the Constitution”36
In the case of Basco vs. PAGCOR37, the Supreme Court stand that under a
unitary system of government, local governments can only be an intra-sovereign
subdivision of a sovereign nation, and it cannot be an imperium in imperio. Therefore,
34
National Statistics and Coordination Board, 2013. 35
Rodriguez. Rethinking Federalism in the Light of Social Justice. 36
Kida vs. Senate, G.R. No. 196271, October 18, 2011. 37
Basco vs. Philippine Amusements and Gaming Corporation, 197 SCRA 52 (1991).
22
the ARMM being a form of local government unit, although granted with political
autonomy it shall remain a regional entity which will continue to operate within the larger
framework of the State. It is still subject to the national policies set by the national
government, save only for those specific areas reserved by the Constitution for regional
autonomous determination
Extent of Powers of Autonomous Regions
The Kida Decision clarified the reserved powers of the National Government vis-
à-vis the enumerated Powers of the autonomous regions under Sec. 20, Art. X of the
1987 Constitution. Those not enumerated are actually to be exercised by the national
government.” Section 20 of Article X provides:
“Within its territorial jurisdiction and subject to the provisions of this
Constitution and national laws, the Organic Act of Autonomous Regions
shall provide for legislative powers over:
(1) Administrative organization; (2) Creation of sources of
revenues; (3) Ancestral domain and natural resources; (4) Personal,
family, and property relations; (5) Regional urban and rural planning
development; (6) Economic, social, and tourism development; (7)
Educational policies; (8) Preservation and development of the cultural
heritage; and (9) Such other matters as may be authorized by law for the
promotion of the general welfare of the region.”
Regional laws are subject not only to the Constitution but also to national laws, in
a practically blanket manner, precisely as a function or feature of the unitary system of
government.
In the case Sema vs. COMELEC,38 the Supreme Court held that ARMM Regional
assembly cannot create a province without a legislative district because the Constitution
mandates that every province shall have a legislative district. Moreover, it cannot enact
a law creating a national office like the office of a district representative of Congress
38
Sema vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 77597, July 16, 2008.
23
because its legislative powers operate only within its territorial jurisdiction.
Noteworthy in this case is the dissenting opinion of Associate Justice Dante
Tinga; “[w]ith this ruling, the Court has dealt another severe blow to the cause of local
autonomy.” He described local autonomy rule for Muslim Mindanao and the Cordillera
region as a “new paradigm [that] is crystallized under Article X of the Constitution…
such a paradigm partakes of a constitutional mandate.” He further made the
progressive point that “if there is no constitutional bar against the exercise of the powers
of government by the autonomous government in Muslim Mindanao, particularly by the
Regional Assembly, then there is no basis to thwart the constitutional design by denying
such powers to that body.”
The rationale for the herein Decision shows how the autonomous regions are still
very much tied up to (and tied down by) “the status quo of a unitary system.
The trend of Supreme Court decisions is very much influenced by the growing
awareness of the ills in the ARMM. There is direct correlation between ARMM as a
failed experiment and the evolving jurisprudence tipping power and control to the
national government at the expense of the region‟s autonomy as decentralization of
power. Despite the introduction of electoral democracy and the “political integration” of
the Bangsamoro into the larger body politic, the current state of ARMM is still far from
what the Moros are hoping for- self-determination. There is need of social legislation,
addressing not only the resolution of the political dimension of the insurgency of the
Bangsamoro but the root causes of underdevelopment in the region as a whole that
fueled their rebellion in the first place. One thing is for sure, it is the Bangsamoro
themselves who should determine what is good for themselves.
Federalism: On Economy
Another advantage of Federalism is in its distribution of goods. Federalism gears
towards decentralization of government giving each state the capacity to be self-reliant
in almost all aspects of their governance; each state has the responsibility to generate
income on their own finding ways to fund different projects to its constituents. Although it
24
is not far from the concept of LGU its advantage is that the income from the production
of a certain region or 'state' in a Federal form of government will return from where it
came from. In other words each state has a big responsibility to generate their own
income since its own income will be their own source of fund.
In the Philippine Context: Local Government Unit
We have decided to focus our attention with the Local Government Unit, since it
has somewhat similar concept to that of a Federal form of government which gives
autonomy to each Local Government Unit in terms of their own ways of taxation and
legislation. How is the budget allocated with the LGUs?
A research was conducted by the Government of the Philippines together with
Department of Local and Interior Government, United Nations Environment Programme
and United Nation Development Programme entitled 'Review of collection and
distribution of revenues from natural resources‟ that were published last July 2012. It
has the aim to come up with a recommendation on how to increase the share of LGUs
from the national wealth; it discussed how our present local government units receive
revenues from the National government as well as the income from their own natural
resources.
According to the research citing section 6 and 7, Article X of the 1987 Philippines
constitution which states “ Local government units shall have a just share, as
determined by law, in the national taxes which shall be automatically released to them.”
And that “Local governments shall be entitled to an equitable share in the proceeds of
the utilization and development of the national wealth within their respective areas, in
the manner provided by law, including sharing the same with the inhabitants by way of
direct benefits.”
According to the research the Local Government Unit's largest budget allocation
comes from the Internal Revenue Allocation. Aside from that the LGU has shares from
the Bureau of Internal revenue from the taxes collected that were generated from the
natural resources found in their place. The problem with this is that, there are places
25
which do not generate much income from their natural resources but because on the
nature of their place. For example a city that does not have any natural resources but is
a center of business might generate a lot of income because of the rich economic
activities. Aside from the income they generate through taxes collected by their LGUs,
they will also be having budget allocation from the National government. Given that set
up, how about the Local Government Unit who generates billions because of the Natural
Resources found in their place (ex. mining) but is not in a form of a city therefore has no
additional way of generating income? Provided that the income generated from their
natural resources will not be totally owned by the places but will only have shares as
mandated by law.
Given that there is already an allocation and share from these resources that the
law vests upon Local Government Units, in the Federal form of government these
shares would be no longer shares but their own revenue. Meaning, there are chances
that the Local Government Unit will benefit more from the income coming from the
resources that are produced in their land. They become the major player of their
economy and major administrator rather than waiting for the budget allocation coming
from the National Government and the shares provided by law in terms of the present
natural resources seen in their land.
People will be more involved in terms of their economic activity and will probably
give more concern in terms of production, will thus produce more imagination,
involvement on how they can make their economy more sustainable and productive. It
is because their main source of income is not the allocation from the government which
comes from different provinces but based from their own production. Everybody will
have their role in the state . Not only the producers but also the consumers and most of
all the state government.
This kind of system in the Federal form of government will really benefit the place
which generates big revenues in terms of their production and natural resources but in
return might receive less than what they have produced. As what the former President
Gloria said in his 2005 State of the Nation Address “Perhaps it is time to take the power
from the center to the countryside that feeds it”
26
Federalism: On Culture
It cannot be disputed that the Philippines is a country rich in culture. Pre-colonial,
colonial, post-colonial traditions and customs still exist in the country. Although already
not in their purest form (i.e. indigenous people experienced acculturation) but still the
beliefs and way of thinking these periods brought become embedded and accepted in
our practice and is still evident on how we view things in our society. It has also become
a major player on how we make laws. One evident example is our being subject to
colonial rule of Spanish which brought Catholicism in the country. 150 years from our
liberation from the Spanish Colony we still adopt the view on Catholicism thus played a
great role on how legislator view some of the laws passed in our country. One good
example is the existing debate on the law of Reproductive Health Bill. It is an issue
where the Catholic sector in our country involves itself so much in the issue to the point
that some of its members or dioceses were dropping names of the politicians not to be
voted last election because of their stance on the issue.
Culture is one of the price possessions of a place. Since culture is unique on
each place once it is lost then there will be no other community which will adopt it since
they do not practice the kind of way of life, beliefs of people since they have their own.
Sometimes, culture can be lost when the assimilation to the central government which
aims for 'homogenic' way of viewing things, meaning, they lay down rules on what is
right and wrong even though it does not agree with the tradition of a place. Since the
Philippines is rich on that and it has been very proud of it, it cannot afford to lose these
culture practiced by different group of people found in different parts of the countries
because of centralization. Our government has in fact recognized their importance and
enact law that will protect them. One major law that acknowledges their uniqueness and
sovereignty is of course found in the 1987 Philippines Constitution which acknowledges
the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao and the Cordillera Autonomous Region.
These places had their own system of government way back the pre-colonial times. The
Spain failed to assimilate these groups into their own government which has of course
the goal of Christianizing people. Although it is to be remembered that they are not the
only cultural groups whom the Spanish Colonizers failed to integrate to their own
27
government. With that the government has also enacted law for our indigenous people.
One statute which protects the right of our Indigenous People is RA 8371 or the
“The Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997” .Its Declaration of State and policy
particularly section 2 and 3 provides:
a) The State shall recognize and promote the rights of ICCs/IPs within the
framework of national unity and development;
b) The State shall protect the rights of ICCs/IPs to their ancestral domains to
ensure their economic, social and cultural wellbeing and shall recognize the
applicability of customary laws governing property rights or relations in determining
the ownership and extent of ancestral domain;
This state policy of IPRA Law protects the right of our IP most especially in their
ancestral domain. However, despite of this law there are still pressing issues regarding
the management of their ancestral domain. One issue that is concurrent is the
exploitation of their ancestral domain by the foreign investors through exploration and
possible applying for permit allowing massive exploitation of our own natural resources
which are allowed by the National Government and in fact aided by them through
deployment of military officials not the local police to protect these foreign investors from
possible action of the IP groups. If a population or a local government unit is dominated
by our minority group, the power and the approval of state makes it impossible to insist
their own autonomy and probably voice out their opinion about these possible
exploration and exploitation.
With the federal form of government, the National state cannot dictate to the
federal states on what their decision when foreign investors enter their places especially
the ancestral domain since the federal government where these ancestral domains are
located has the sole authority.
As the preservation of the place of a community is highly connected to the culture
of a place, the protection of their ancestral domain through the autonomy given by the
Federal form of government is definitely important.
Not only that, a place which has different set of customs can already enact law
28
without having to consider the main constitution of the land since they can very well
make their own set of constitution. Their concept of justice and way of implementing it
might be different from what the central government have. Implementing the central
government's idea might also in a way force these groups to change their views thus it
will affect their culture. It might prevent them from practicing it which is supposed to be
the number one requirement to keep traditions alive, it is to constant practice and
reinforcement. With the Federal form of government, as what have been mentioned in
the early parts of this paper, it will allow the people to create laws in accordance with
their own concept, may it be of law, justice, and on how they manage to plan their
economy or land without contradicting their own customs.
Conversion to Federalism
A shift from a unitary form of government to a federal one would entail a stringent
process with a need to lay down a long-term plan to fully realize the change in the form
of government. This includes envisioning the phase of transition in implementing
federalism as well as change management during the initiation, planning and execution
stages of the conversion.
It may readily be perceived that the shift to federalism will be met with much
resistance from unitary system advocates as well as citizens used to the norm or
present system of Local Government Units. However, it must be pointed out that the
change we envision is not an overhaul. A presidential system will still be retained albeit
a federal form will be adopted instead of the unitary form. Given the current system of
decentralization and autonomy given to regional and local governments, the transition
will find easier application as compared to a strictly centralized government.
Moreover, to avoid these problems, an intricate framework for integration and a
high level of democratic political development is needed.39 It bears stressing that the
conversion is a long-term endeavour; thus a need for an extensive plan of action.
39
M. Fillipov & O. Shvetsova, Federalism, Democracy and Democratization, January 2011, Binghamton University, New York.
29
Steps for Conversion to a Federal-Presidential Government
In order to facilitate a smooth transition from a unitary to a federal form of
government, a ten-year preparation plan was proposed by Alex Brillantes, Jr., a
prominent name in the field of political science especially in local governance. The first
five years of his proposed plan are more construed towards the creation and
administration of a federal movement organization while the last half deals more on the
steps in attaining a newly adopted Constitution. Throughout the plan, the need for
continuous holding of conferences and seminars to inform about federalism is evident.
Using the Brillantes transition action plan as a guide, we have come up with the
proposed plan for conversion as follows:
Preparatory Stage Constitutional Convention
Creation of a Constitutional Convention tasked to revise the current Constitution and convert the unitary form of government to a federal one while retaining the presidential system
Holding of the Constitutional Convention including integration of proposals and deliberation on the intricacies and drafts of the amendments, revisions and/or changes for the new Constitution
Government Agencies
Listing of all government agencies, personnel and officials, both national and local, affected by the shift to federalism
Consultation with the governmental agencies on how the conversion will affect their institution, employees and objectives
Information Drive and Consultation
Conducting information seminars and media on federalism, how it will affect the country and the citizenry
Gather feedback on the people‟s concerns regarding the implementation and transition
Initiation Stage Submission of the proposed amendments to the Constitution
Creation of the final proposed amendments/revisions through Congress
The proposed revision will be approved according to the provisions of the 1987 Constitution on Amendments and Revisions (Article XVII)
Transition Phase 1 Dissemination of copies of the approved proposal for the New Constitution, stressing the change to federalism
Conducting information seminars and media on the highlights of the changes brought about by the shift in government organization because of the implementation of federalism
Holding of an assembly with the heads of local government units for briefing on the effects of the conversion
Implementation Stage The 1987 Philippine Constitution will be officially revised to pattern a federal form of government
Adoption of the new Philippine Constitution
Transition Phase 2 Addressing common misconceptions regarding the new Constitution and federal system
30
Interpretation of conflicting or vague provisions in the Constitution by the Supreme Court to be used as case laws
Transitioning of the functions as well as information, data or accounts of previous national government agencies to their state government counterparts
Transition Phase 3 Introduction of minor amendments to the new Constitution based on the feedback from the implementation, focusing on aspects of the Constitution which gave rise to misapprehensions and conflict
a) Preparatory Stage
To prepare for the implementation of federalism in the Philippines, the first task
would be to revise the current Philippine Constitution accordingly. Article XVII of the
1987 Philippine Constitution provides for two ways in which the Constitution may be
revised: through the Congress or through a constitutional commission. Of these two, we
strongly believe that the creation of a constitutional convention will be more practical
and wise given that the Congress is directly affected if federalism will be pursued. A
constitutional convention, similar to the 2005 Consultative Commission, will function
independently of the Congress, although there is a need as well for representatives
from the same department. However, unlike the 2005 ConCom, this constitutional
convention will mainly be tasked to look into the change from unitary to federal,
excluding the shift from a presidential system to a parliamentary.
During this stage, the various government agencies, bureaus, offices and
departments expected to be affected by this change must also be identified and
consulted with. The rationale behind this is that the institutions themselves as well as
the public officers and employees under them will be susceptible to change; they may
be expanded, reduced in size, transferred, or totally abolished depending on the
functions of their offices. Government agencies whose functions will be deemed under
state or local government will be directed or transferred in control to the different states,
if not abolished since the newly created states can create their own agencies anew. On
the same rationale, those agencies which will become purely national in nature might
need expansion to accommodate the overall needs of the federal government.
The desired change in the form of government should be handled with great care
and diligence. It is important that the initial presentation to the public be well-accepted or
at the very least, not met with negative or even detrimental perception. This will serve as
31
the foundation as to how the next stages of the transition will be received. Included in
this stage is a thorough information drive to enable the people to fully understand the
nature and effects of the conversion. It must be evident to them that democracy will still
stand; they must be able to determine the extent of the change in order to have
politically mature decisions.
b) Initiation Stage
The initiating factor for the transition towards federalism will be the official
recommendation given by the duly assembled constitutional convention. This will serve
as the major reference or basis for the push for revision of the current Philippine
Constitution. This may or may not be forwarded to Congress for initiation of the process
of revision. However, it would be advisable that the Congress be the one to initiate the
change for smoother and faster convening.
c) Transition Phase 1
Once the proposal for the revision of the 1987 Philippine Constitution has been
officially approved, the next step would be to inform the public of the actual changes the
proposed Constitution will give effect to. In contrast to the information drive in the
preparatory stage, the information to be disseminated in this stage will be the actual
changes and not simple those foreseen. The original and the proposed Constitution as
well as highlights of the changes especially those brought about by the shift to
federalism must be made readily available to the people through different media. The
public must also be informed on when and how the voting for ratification will take place.
Other than the general public, the government agencies and instrumentalities
affected, as listed from the preparatory stage, must as well be briefed thoroughly of the
actual changes that will take effect if and when the proposed Constitution will be ratified
by the people. A plan on the transitioning of the different agencies to their state or local
government counterparts must also be created in consultation with them. Salaries,
benefits, employment assistance and aid, and other transitional measures or assistance
must also be given the officers and employees.
32
d) Implementation Stage
On the day set for the plebiscite, the people of the Philippines will vote for the
approval or disapproval of the proposed Constitution. If the voting will be successful and
the votes are in favor of the new Constitution, then the new Constitution will be deemed
ratified in accordance to Section 4, Article XVII of the Constitution. The new Constitution
will take effect on the same day of ratification, the day when the sovereign people
voted.40
e) Transition Phase 2
The second transition phase after the adoption of the new Constitution will focus
on issue management. There may be points of the new Constitution which, although
already approved by the people, will give rise to different interpretations. The task to
interpret possible lapses, conflicts, misunderstanding or misconception will necessarily
fall upon the judicial department. It is expected that during this phase, cases will be filed
which seek the resolution of problem areas in the interpretation and application of the
Constitution.
In terms of the government agencies, their transitioning must also be started in
light of the adoption of the new Constitution. The guidelines, as created in the first
phase of the transition, must be followed in order for a smooth transition of information,
data, employees, and accounts from the previous national agencies to the newly
created agencies under each state government.
f) Transition Phase 3
The last step for the conversion would still involve transitioning. At this stage,
amendments to the newly adopted Constitution may be introduced with reference to
various decided cases and recommendations from the Supreme Court or lower court
judges. This phase will necessarily follow only if there is a need for amendment to
change obvious flaws or inconsistencies based on jurisprudence. If these problems may
be remedied by interpretation, there will be no need as the principles established in
case laws will guide future cases on the same issues.
40
De Leon vs. Esguerra, G.R. No. 78059 (August 31, 1987), 153 SCRA 602.
33
Conclusion
Federalism in general offers a wide ranges of advantage over that of unitary
system. First and foremost it brings closer the people to their own government. It is
because of its 'banner' concept which is decentralization. It brings the central
government to their own region. It will promotes not only 'meaningful' but a genuine
autonomy to the Local Government. It brings more responsibility to the leaders to be
more effective and innovative interms of their legislation and governance. Given that, it
will also bring a long lasting peace in the longstanding conflict in Mindanao regarding
the ARMM and the wish of the Bangsamoro to have a genuine autonomy over their
ancestral land without being removed from the Jurisdiction of the Philippines.
Second it will encourage locals to be more involve in their production of goods
as well as in boosting their economic activities since they only have their land as their
major source of income. Not only that, these people in return would be more cautious in
protecting their own Natural resources since it is the only source of income and that the
immediate goal should be a sustainable development in economy rather than massive
destruction and foreign intrusion.
And last, it protects culture. As what have been pointed out in the earlier parts of
this paper, federalism gives liberty of laws to the states. Given the diversity of culture
we might not have that homogeneic view of things.Some customs or laws of a place
might be contradictory to that of the other place. This kind of conflicts might be
addressed better if the power are decentralized and will be given to the local
government units.
The process of changing the federal form of government might be a painstaking
one.In fact it can be considered as radical. From the creation of the Consitutional
Commissions to the different transition phases which involves information drive and
different consultations with different government agencies which might be affected with
the change of constitution, real dedication and support from the people are needed to
make this transition meaningful and operative.
34
Although debates may arise as to the timeliness of this change of constitution but
if now is not the appropiate time, when? There are so many pressing issues in our
country our present government can no longer address that not even the change of
administration can do. It is because our problems are already deeply rooted with the a
problematic system. The system of bureacracy inherent in a unitary form of government
which is supposedly good but is now a breeding area of officials who are corrupt and
are motivated by their own personal interest. Our present system is hopeless because
the people had already learned to accept, deal and even participate in it (I.e the
presence of fixers, redtape) which should never be the case.
Federalism does not guarantee to solve these problems. What this kind of
govermment offers is a brand NEW form of system. A kind of government that will bring
the people closer to it. A kind of system that symbolizes a fresh start from the long evil
practice of people who are in power who sees government as not a public service but of
business. A kind of system which inculcates to the mind of the people that they should
expect much from their leaders and that they should be vigilant with their rights because
they are already a major player in the success of their own government. A kind of
system which gives independence to the people thus giving them no choice but to rely
on their own efforts. And lastly a kind of system which gives autonomy to its region,
giving them the liberation of creating their individual consitution without them being
called another country.
Then we go back to our main question: “Would changing our traditional unitary
Republic to the Federal Republic of the Philippines the right choice?” Given all the
things that has been discussed in this paper, we are in definitely in the affirmative. What
we are really after is the better state of our country. And we firmly believe that although
Federalism might not be perfect but it is definitely the right choice. It can bring us to the
kind of Philippines every Filipino deserves. A kind of Philippines that not our present
kind of government can give us. A kind of Philippines that only Federal government can
give. Federalism is the answer. Federalism now!
35
Primary Sources
The 1987 Constitution of the Philippines
Basco vs. Philippine Amusements and Gaming Corporation, G.R. No. 91649 (May 14,
1991), 197 SCRA 52.
Disomangcop vs. Secretary, G.R. No. 149848 (November 25, 2004), 444 SCRA 203.
Ganzon vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 93252, 93746, 95245 (August 5, 1991), 200
SCRA 271, 281.
The Indigenous People's Rights Act, RA 8371, approved October 29, 1997.
Kida vs. Senate, G.R. No. 196271, (October 18, 2011), resolved February 28, 2012.
The Local Government Code of 1991, Republic Act No. 7160, effective January 1, 1992.
Sema vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 77597 (July 16, 2008).
Secondary References
Abueva, Jose V., 2001. ‘Towards a Federal Republic of the Philippines’, IBP [Integrated
Bar of the Philippines] Law Journal 27(2):1-30.
Agoncillo, T. & Guerrero. (1973).M. History of the Filipino People (4th edn,) pp 46-7.
Brillantes and Mossacre: Decentralization and Federalism in the Philippines: Lesson
from the Global Community date retrieved: October 31 2012, retrieved from: www.up-
ncpag.org/pdf/decentralization_federalism.pdf
2005 Consultative Commission Session 3, Oct 3, 2005. Transcript of the proceedings,
p.17. Date retrieved: November 5, 2013. Retrieved from: http://pcij.org/blog/wp-
docs/chacha/Session03_T00305p.pdf
Cruz, I. (2002) Philippine Political Law.
Dr. Soriano, Ma. Cecilia and Makayan Elizabeth , [2012] Review of collection and
distribution of revenues from natural resources', Date retrieved: November 10 2013,
Retrieved from http://www.unpei.org/sites/default/files/e_library_documents/Review_of _
Collection_and_Distribution_of_Revenues_from_Natural_Resources.pdf
36
Manasan, (1992). Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations, Fiscal Federalism, and Economic
Development in the Philippines working Paper series No. 92-04. Retrieved from
http://dirp4.pids.gov.ph/ris/wp/pidswp9204.pdf.
May, Robert (2007) Federalism versus Autonomy: Debate and Practice in the
Philippines, date retrieved: November 4 2013, retrieved from http://www.iag.org.ph
/index.php/blog/444-federalism-versus-autonomy-debate-and-practice-in-the-philippines
McClellan James [1989] Liberty, Order, and Justice: An Introduction to the
Constitutional Principles of American Government, date retrieved: November 8 2013
retrieved from: http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3F
title=679&chapter=68462&layout=html&Itemid=27 source
National Statistics and Coordination Board 2013
Rodriguez. (n.d.) Rethinking Federalism in the Light of Social Justice retrieved from
http://code-ngo.org/home/images/stories/pdf/Constitutional_Reform_and_Federalism
.pdf.
Tanggol, S.(2010). "Regional Autonomy, Federalism and the Bangsamoro Issue”.