- Winston S. Churchill-
I.
INTRODUCTION
Yale University Scholar Robert Dahl identified six (6) major institutional ingredients that would give rise to what he calls “full democracy[1],” to wit:
· Elected officials – Control over government decisions about policy is constitutionally vested in officials elected by citizens.
· Thus, modern large scale- democratic governments are representative.
· Free, fair and frequent elections – Elected officials are chosen in frequent and fairly conducted elections in which coercion is comparatively uncommon.
· Freedom of expression – Citizens have a right to express themselves without danger of severe punishment on political matters broadly defined, including criticism of officials, the government, the regime, the socioeconomic order, and the prevailing idealogy.
· Access to alternative sources of information – Citizens have a right to seek out alternative and independent sources of information from other citizens, experts, newspapers, magazines, books, telecommunications, and the like. Moreover, alternative sources of information actually exist that are not under the control of the government or any other single political group attempting to influence public political beliefs and attitudes, and these alternative sources are effectively protected by law.
· Associate autonomy – To achieve their various rights, including those required for the effective operation of democratic political institutions, citizens also have a right to form relatively independent associations or organizations, including independent political parties and interest groups.
· Inclusive citizenship – These include the right to vote in the election of officials in free and fairer elections; to run for elective office; to free expression; to form and participate in independent political organizations; to have access to independent sources of information; and the rights to other liberties and opportunities that may be necessary to the effective operation of the political institutions of large scale democracy.
These are what Dahl also calls, the “minimum requirements for a democratic country.
Aside from these minimum requirement, Wood also identifies other essential conditions favorable to the development of democracy. These essential conditions, Wood writes are those without which democracy cannot survive. These essential conditions include the following:
· Civilian control of the military and police
· Democratic political culture
· Absence of intervention by foreign powers
INTRODUCTION
Yale University Scholar Robert Dahl identified six (6) major institutional ingredients that would give rise to what he calls “full democracy[1],” to wit:
· Elected officials – Control over government decisions about policy is constitutionally vested in officials elected by citizens.
· Thus, modern large scale- democratic governments are representative.
· Free, fair and frequent elections – Elected officials are chosen in frequent and fairly conducted elections in which coercion is comparatively uncommon.
· Freedom of expression – Citizens have a right to express themselves without danger of severe punishment on political matters broadly defined, including criticism of officials, the government, the regime, the socioeconomic order, and the prevailing idealogy.
· Access to alternative sources of information – Citizens have a right to seek out alternative and independent sources of information from other citizens, experts, newspapers, magazines, books, telecommunications, and the like. Moreover, alternative sources of information actually exist that are not under the control of the government or any other single political group attempting to influence public political beliefs and attitudes, and these alternative sources are effectively protected by law.
· Associate autonomy – To achieve their various rights, including those required for the effective operation of democratic political institutions, citizens also have a right to form relatively independent associations or organizations, including independent political parties and interest groups.
· Inclusive citizenship – These include the right to vote in the election of officials in free and fairer elections; to run for elective office; to free expression; to form and participate in independent political organizations; to have access to independent sources of information; and the rights to other liberties and opportunities that may be necessary to the effective operation of the political institutions of large scale democracy.
These are what Dahl also calls, the “minimum requirements for a democratic country.
Aside from these minimum requirement, Wood also identifies other essential conditions favorable to the development of democracy. These essential conditions, Wood writes are those without which democracy cannot survive. These essential conditions include the following:
· Civilian control of the military and police
· Democratic political culture
· Absence of intervention by foreign powers
II.
THE PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION ON DEMOCRACY
Are constitutions important to a country’s democracy?
Dahl believes that constitutions matter to a country’s democracy in many ways. A constitution he says can provide the following:
· Stability to political institutions
· Protect fundamental rights
· Maintain neutrality among citizens
· Hold political leaders accountable for their decisions
· Fair representation
· Informed consensus on laws and policies
· Effective Government
· Competent decisions
· Transparency and accountability
· Resiliency
· Legitimacy
Does the Philippine constitution provide these? Are the six (6) so-called institutional ingredients of and three (3) essential conditions of democracy present in the Philippine constitution?
a.) A historical framework of the Philippine Constitution.
The Philippine Constitution has been rewritten seven times starting from the Biak-na-Bato Constitution to the 1987 Constitution. The political evolution and every significant event in the Philippine history resulted a change in the constitution.
THE PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION ON DEMOCRACY
Are constitutions important to a country’s democracy?
Dahl believes that constitutions matter to a country’s democracy in many ways. A constitution he says can provide the following:
· Stability to political institutions
· Protect fundamental rights
· Maintain neutrality among citizens
· Hold political leaders accountable for their decisions
· Fair representation
· Informed consensus on laws and policies
· Effective Government
· Competent decisions
· Transparency and accountability
· Resiliency
· Legitimacy
Does the Philippine constitution provide these? Are the six (6) so-called institutional ingredients of and three (3) essential conditions of democracy present in the Philippine constitution?
a.) A historical framework of the Philippine Constitution.
The Philippine Constitution has been rewritten seven times starting from the Biak-na-Bato Constitution to the 1987 Constitution. The political evolution and every significant event in the Philippine history resulted a change in the constitution.
The first Philippine constitution is the Biyak-na-Bato Constitution that was enacted in 1897. It outlined the revolutionary objectives of independence from Spain.
Two years later, the president decreed the creation of the Malolos Constitution. A new central government was set up with executive, legislative and judiciary branches. It governed the First Philippine Republic proclaimed in the Barasoain Church in the same year.
Due to the turbulent times of the early governments, the first two constitution were not fully enforced. What is considered the first Philippine Constitution to be fully enforced was drafted by the virtue of the Tydings-McDuffie Law in 1934 during the Commonwealth Period. It was enforced from 1935 - 1943.
During World War II, a short lived constitution (The 1943 Constitution) was sponsored by the Japanese invaders within their own program of Japanization.When the political independence was granted by the United States in 1946, the constitution was revised and was enforced from 1946 to 1973.
Eventually considered inadequate against the changing needs of Filipinos, the 1935 Constitution was replaced with a new one ratified in 1973. The 1973 Constitution was approved for ratification two months after the imposition of the martial law on November 29, 1972.
When Ferdinand E. Marcos was ousted in 1986, the new government led by Corazon C. Aquino promulgated what is now know as the Freedom Constitution. This 1987 Constitution restored the presidential form of government.
b.) Democracy in the Philippine Constitution
For us to resolve on whether or not the Philippine Constitution can be classified as democratic or not, the framework provided by Dahl on the essential ingredients of democracy and the essential conditions of democracy are to be used in this paper.
The provisions in the 1987 Constitution where we can say the essential ingredients and conditions of democracy can be found are:
ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS OF DEMOCRACY
RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
Elected Officials
Article V (Suffrage)
Article VI, section 2 (Election of Senators)
Article VI, section 3 (Qualifications of Senator)
Article VI, section 4 (Term of office of Senators)
Article VI, section 5 (Election of Members, House of Representatives)
Article VI, section 5 (2) Party list Representatives
Article VI, section 6 (Qualifications of Members of House of Representatives)
Article VI, section 7 (Term of office of Members of the House of Representatives)
Article VI, section 6 (Regular election of Senators and Members of House of Representatives)
Article VII, sections 2,3, 4, 5 (Executive Department – Qualifications of President and Vice-President; Election; Oath)
Article X, section 8 (Term of office of Local Government Officials)
Free, fair and frequent elections
Article VI, section 2 (Election of Senators)
Article VI, section 3 (Qualifications of Senator)
Article VI, section 4 (Term of office of Senators)
Article VI, section 5 (Election of Members, House of Representatives)
Article VI, section 5 (2) Party list Representatives
Article VI, section 6 (Qualifications of Members of House of Representatives)
Article VI, section 7 (Term of office of Members of the House of Representatives)
Article VI, section 6 (Regular election of Senators and Members of House of Representatives)
Article VII, sections 2,3, 4, 5 (Executive Department – Qualifications of President and Vice-President; Election; Oath)
Article X, section 8 (Term of office of Local Government Officials)
Free, fair and frequent elections
Article V (Suffrage)
Article VI, section 4 (Term of Office of Senators)
Article VI, section 7 (Term of office of Members of the House of Representatives)
Article VII, section 4 (Term of office of the President and Vice- President)
Article X, section 8 (Term of office of Local Government Officials)
Article IX, C (Commission on Elections)
Freedom of Expression
Article VI, section 4 (Term of Office of Senators)
Article VI, section 7 (Term of office of Members of the House of Representatives)
Article VII, section 4 (Term of office of the President and Vice- President)
Article X, section 8 (Term of office of Local Government Officials)
Article IX, C (Commission on Elections)
Freedom of Expression
Article II, section 28 (State Policy adopting full public disclosure on all transactions involving public interest)
Article III, Section 4 (Freedom of Speech, of expression, or the right of the people peaceably assemble to petition the government for redress of grievances)
Article III, Section 7 (Right to information on matters of public concern)
Article III, Section 18 (1) – No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
Alternative sources of information
Article II, section 28 (State Policy adopting full public disclosure on all transactions involving public interest)
Article III, Section 4 (Freedom of Speech, of expression, or the right of the people peaceably assemble to petition the government for redress of grievances)
Article III, Section 18 (1) – No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
Associational autonomy
Article III, Section 4 (Freedom of Speech, of expression, or the right of the people peaceably assemble to petition the government for redress of grievances)
Article III, Section 7 (Right to information on matters of public concern)
Article III, Section 18 (1) – No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
Alternative sources of information
Article II, section 28 (State Policy adopting full public disclosure on all transactions involving public interest)
Article III, Section 4 (Freedom of Speech, of expression, or the right of the people peaceably assemble to petition the government for redress of grievances)
Article III, Section 18 (1) – No person shall be detained solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.
Associational autonomy
Article II, section 23 (State shall encourage non-governmental, community based, or sectoral organizations that promote the welfare of the nation.)
Article III, section 8 (Right to form unions, associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law)
Inclusive citizenship
Article III, section 26 (Equal access to opportunities for public service)
Article II, section 23 (State shall encourage non-governmental, community based, or sectoral organizations that promote the welfare of the nation.)
Article II, section 28 (State Policy adopting full public disclosure on all transactions involving public interest)
Article III, Section 4 (Freedom of Speech, of expression, or the right of the people peaceably assemble to petition the government for redress of grievances)
Article III, Section 7 (Right to information on matters of public concern)
Article III, section 8 (Right to form unions, associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law)
Article VI, section 2 (Election of Senators)
Article VI, section 3 (Qualifications of Senator)
Article VI, section 7 (Term of office of Members of the House of Representatives)
Article VII, section 4 (Term of office of the President and Vice- President)
Article X, section 8 (Term of office of Local Government Officials)
Article IX, C (Commission on Elections)
ESSENTIAL CONDITIONS OF DEMOCRACY
RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE 1987CONSTITUTION
Article II, section 23 (State shall encourage non-governmental, community based, or sectoral organizations that promote the welfare of the nation.)
Article II, section 28 (State Policy adopting full public disclosure on all transactions involving public interest)
Article III, Section 4 (Freedom of Speech, of expression, or the right of the people peaceably assemble to petition the government for redress of grievances)
Article III, Section 7 (Right to information on matters of public concern)
Article III, section 8 (Right to form unions, associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law)
Article VI, section 2 (Election of Senators)
Article VI, section 3 (Qualifications of Senator)
Article VI, section 7 (Term of office of Members of the House of Representatives)
Article VII, section 4 (Term of office of the President and Vice- President)
Article X, section 8 (Term of office of Local Government Officials)
Article IX, C (Commission on Elections)
ESSENTIAL CONDITIONS OF DEMOCRACY
RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE 1987CONSTITUTION
Civilian control of the military and police
Article II, section 3 (Civilian authority over military)
Article VII, section 18 (Emergency powers of the President)
Democratic political culture
Article VII, section 18 (Emergency powers of the President)
Democratic political culture
Article II, section 1 (The Philippines as a democratic and a republican state.)
Article IV (The Bill of Rights)
Article V (Suffrage)
Article VI (Legislative Department)
Article VII (Executive Department)
Article VIII (Judiciary)
Absence of Intervention by foreign powers
Article IV (The Bill of Rights)
Article V (Suffrage)
Article VI (Legislative Department)
Article VII (Executive Department)
Article VIII (Judiciary)
Absence of Intervention by foreign powers
Article II, section 7 (State Policy to pursue an independent foreign policy)
Article II, section 8 (Policy of freedom from nuclear weapons)
Article II, section 19 (Develop a self-reliant and independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos)
III.
A CRITICAL DETERMINATION OF THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN THE PHILIPPINES UNDER THE ARROYO GOVERNMENT BASED ON THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
While the Philippines prides itself as a “democratic and republican state,” the question presented is whether the present government under Gloria Macapagal Arroyo honors the institutions and conditions necessary for democracy to thrive.
In terms of the essential ingredients of democracy, we note the following points:
The institutional structure of Philippine democracy is solid on the outside. It is however by looking more deeply that the serious limitations begin to appear.[2]
In terms however of the institutional prerequisite on freedom of expression, alternative sources of information, associational autonomy, the Arroyo administration is a dismal failure. During the past three years in particular, we have seen the issuance of various presidential edicts, such as:
a.) Policy on calibrated preemptive response
b.) Executive Order 464
c.) Declaration of State of Emergency
These presidential edicts have all been struck down by the Supreme Court, for violating constitutional precepts on freedom of expression and executive privilige. Offhand though, such presidential edicts show the tenacity of the present administration to remain in power at all cost under the guise of protecting democratic institutions.
Other issues that affect the institutional prerequisites are the on-going extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances of human rights activists. These human rights violations send a chilling effect to those opposing the Arroyo administration.
Wood further believes that, the essential conditions for democracy are not at all favorable in the Philippines.
This statement of Wood is affirmed by the following facts:
a.) Interference of the Military in politics
b.) Militarization of the civilian bureaucracy through the appointment of retired officials in the bureaucracy
c.) Restrictive political culture, where people power is a norm rather than an exception.
d.) Over-centralization of political power
e.) Execution of various bilateral defense and trade agreements (e.g., Visiting Forces Agreement with US and the Japanese- Philippines Economic Agreement) which restricts the exercise of sovereignty by the Philippines.
IV.
FINAL REMARKS
In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. The Philippines now finds itself in a cross road, where democratic institutions are severely being tested, information and participation in the crafting of policies being limited to a cabal of political bureaucrats. Under these circumstances where Filipinos are being lead blindly by a one-eyed queen, is the Philippines therefore still a democratic state?
The state of Philippine democracy has once more become an international issue. In its recent annual report on the global state of human rights and democratic freedoms, the U.S. think tank Freedom House has downgraded the Philippines from a “free” to a “partly free” country. The institute said that the negative status change was “based on credible allegations of massive electoral fraud, corruption, and the government’s intimidation of elements in the political opposition.”[3]
[1] Alan Wood, “Asian Democracy in World History,” page 11. Also cited in Robert Dahl’s book, “ On Democracy,” page 84.
[2] Alan Wood, “Asian Democracy in World History”
[3] Ronald Meinardus, The Weakening of Philippine Democracy, The Korea Times, December 5, 2005
Article II, section 8 (Policy of freedom from nuclear weapons)
Article II, section 19 (Develop a self-reliant and independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos)
III.
A CRITICAL DETERMINATION OF THE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN THE PHILIPPINES UNDER THE ARROYO GOVERNMENT BASED ON THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
While the Philippines prides itself as a “democratic and republican state,” the question presented is whether the present government under Gloria Macapagal Arroyo honors the institutions and conditions necessary for democracy to thrive.
In terms of the essential ingredients of democracy, we note the following points:
The institutional structure of Philippine democracy is solid on the outside. It is however by looking more deeply that the serious limitations begin to appear.[2]
In terms however of the institutional prerequisite on freedom of expression, alternative sources of information, associational autonomy, the Arroyo administration is a dismal failure. During the past three years in particular, we have seen the issuance of various presidential edicts, such as:
a.) Policy on calibrated preemptive response
b.) Executive Order 464
c.) Declaration of State of Emergency
These presidential edicts have all been struck down by the Supreme Court, for violating constitutional precepts on freedom of expression and executive privilige. Offhand though, such presidential edicts show the tenacity of the present administration to remain in power at all cost under the guise of protecting democratic institutions.
Other issues that affect the institutional prerequisites are the on-going extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances of human rights activists. These human rights violations send a chilling effect to those opposing the Arroyo administration.
Wood further believes that, the essential conditions for democracy are not at all favorable in the Philippines.
This statement of Wood is affirmed by the following facts:
a.) Interference of the Military in politics
b.) Militarization of the civilian bureaucracy through the appointment of retired officials in the bureaucracy
c.) Restrictive political culture, where people power is a norm rather than an exception.
d.) Over-centralization of political power
e.) Execution of various bilateral defense and trade agreements (e.g., Visiting Forces Agreement with US and the Japanese- Philippines Economic Agreement) which restricts the exercise of sovereignty by the Philippines.
IV.
FINAL REMARKS
In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. The Philippines now finds itself in a cross road, where democratic institutions are severely being tested, information and participation in the crafting of policies being limited to a cabal of political bureaucrats. Under these circumstances where Filipinos are being lead blindly by a one-eyed queen, is the Philippines therefore still a democratic state?
The state of Philippine democracy has once more become an international issue. In its recent annual report on the global state of human rights and democratic freedoms, the U.S. think tank Freedom House has downgraded the Philippines from a “free” to a “partly free” country. The institute said that the negative status change was “based on credible allegations of massive electoral fraud, corruption, and the government’s intimidation of elements in the political opposition.”[3]
[1] Alan Wood, “Asian Democracy in World History,” page 11. Also cited in Robert Dahl’s book, “ On Democracy,” page 84.
[2] Alan Wood, “Asian Democracy in World History”
[3] Ronald Meinardus, The Weakening of Philippine Democracy, The Korea Times, December 5, 2005
