Centrist Democracy Political Institute - Items filtered by date: February 2018
Monday, 05 February 2018 13:51

Imperial Manila becomes the Evil Empire

Proponents of federalization have repeatedly said their goal is to end the domination of Imperial Manila in our unitary system of government. Federalization will indeed eliminate Imperial Manila, but it will be replaced by the Evil Empire.

History has shown that when a federation is formed with states of disparate sizes, the wealthiest state dominates. An extreme example was Prussia, which had two-thirds of the territory of the old German Confederation, so whatever Prussia wanted, it got. The Allies dismantled Prussia at the end of World War II to prevent this dominance. In Canada, the Ontario-Quebec partnership has dictated the policies of the Canadian Confederation since its inception in 1867. The Soviet Union was dismantled in 1991 by its three most advanced republics—Ukraine, Byelorussia and Russia.

Nevertheless, the proponents of federalization will do just that: Create a federation with big disparities in wealth among the member-states. A partnership between the National Capital Region and Calabarzon will clone the Ontario-Quebec partnership that has resulted in a weak Canadian central government. Just the NCR alone, with its output estimated at more than 50 percent of our gross domestic product, can transform itself from Imperial Manila into Evil Empire by cloning Singapore.


Lee Kuan Yew had an easy task in modernizing Singapore because it is a city-state. A city-state does not have problems of insurgency. Third World insurgencies are caused by poverty in the countryside. The shantytowns in Third World cities are produced by migrants from the rural areas flocking to the urban centers in search of a better life. A city-state thus saves the resources that would be used to fight insurgency and devotes these to development. The compact area of a city-state also means less outlay for infrastructure. Transmission of government communications and policies is fast and effective, without some remote communities left out of the system.

If Metro Manila does not get its way in the proposed federation and decides to secede, it becomes a ready-made Singapore. The NCR will be able to retain all the taxes it collects for its own benefit rather than keep sending a portion of it to subsidize the impoverished states. By declaring its independence, it will be able to stop the endless migration of poor folk from the rural areas. In a short time, because it has the resources, it will be able to eliminate the shantytowns. A low birth rate in the NCR means that it can devote sufficient resources to providing high-quality education to its constituents and quickly transform itself into a First World country like Singapore. Staying within the union will mean the NCR perpetually sharing the poverty of the rest of the country.

The proposed Philippine Federation cannot be a viable entity if the NCR secedes. Since the NCR will have adequate resources, its federal police will be better armed than the police forces of the other member-states. In short, the federal government will not be in a position to use force to keep the NCR in the federation.

And keeping the NCR in the federation will come at a steep price. It will stay only if it becomes the master of the federation, in the same manner that Prussia dictated the policies of the German Confederation. The gap between the wealth of Manila and the rest of the country will grow rather than diminish. Thus, Imperial Manila becomes the Evil Empire in the Philippine Federation.

For a federal system to work in the country, the citizens and the politicians they elect must put the interest of the federation above the interest of a member-state. That is a pipe dream; even now, our loyalty is to family first before Madre Filipinas. Thus, federalization means we maintain a union dominated by an Evil Empire, or we balkanize our country.

Hermenegildo C. Cruz holds a degree in international development jointly conferred by Tufts and Harvard Universities. A retired ambassador, he was posted to Canada, the United States and the Soviet Union and was able to observe “the complexity of running a federal system of government.”

Published in News
THE Deegong this week released 19 names of the 25-man consultative committee headed by former Chief Justice Puno, a perfect choice. This group will now meet to review the 1987 Constitution and within six months, submit to the President its findings and recommendations. This could then be the position of the Executive, to shift to a federal-parliamentary or federal-presidential system.

Ostensibly, this will advance the move by DU30 to put in play a major election pledge. But behind the platitudes are the details, where the devil resides. The delicate issues range from the political structure to the economic underpinnings of the revised constitution and perforce the profile of the coming Philippine Republic.

Meanwhile, the Senate and the House of Representative broke their impasse, with each body constituting itself as a “constituent assembly” and begin deliberations on the details of the revision of the 1987 constitution. The mode of “voting separately or jointly” will be deferred to sometime in the future, postponing what could be the ultimate deal-breaker.
But in the same breath, House Majority Leader Rodolfo Fariñas has defined its relationship with the consultative committee, demarcating its turf: “It cannot and will not work in tandem with Congress. Of course, Congress may consider the commission’s recommendations, as well as those of any citizen, and may adopt or not adopt them at all”.

 

What we have today

(Refer to “Centrist Proposals”, www.cdpi.asia, The Manila Times articles, “Death and Taxes”, June 23, 2016 and “CDP Roadmap to Federalism”, May 11, 2017.)

“The Philippines is a sovereign state governed as a single entity. The central government is supreme and the administrative division or local government units exercise only powers that the central government has delegated to them. Central government is therefore ultimately the source of power (upon the consent of the governed) and can choose to delegate, decentralize and devolve powers but can unilaterally revoke or take them back.

“We also have a presidential system where the executive branch led by a president serves as head of state and head of government and executes the laws of the land. Such laws are legislated by a bicameral body of a senate and house of representatives, and interpreted by the judiciary. In theory, although the 3 branches of government are coequal, in practice, the president is “primus inter-pares” and in fact dominant.”

 

What we want

A parliamentary-federal system (the Centrist position, CDP/CDPI)
“We want a system where power and authority are not centralized but shared between a Federal Government and States (regions, sub-states, etc.). This system allows states to develop themselves the way they see fit based on their culture and specific conditions. Some areas of public life are under the control of the Federal government (security & defense, money & coinage, diplomacy, and foreign affairs, etc.). Some are left to the states (education, revenue generation & taxation, franchises licenses, and permits, etc.), and some are shared (raising taxes, borrowing money, criminal justice, etc.). These are all guaranteed in the constitution.

“We also want a shift from a presidential to a parliamentary government. Briefly, Parliamentary system is known too as “Party Government”, as the political parties have ascendancy over personalities and because of the pivotal role of political parties in parliamentary elections, governance and public administrations. In our proposal, the legislative and the executive powers are fused in a unicameral parliament. The “Head of the Government” is the Prime Minister with his cabinet recruited from among the members of Parliament, while the President is the “Head of State” and Commander-in-Chief of all the armed forces. He is elected from among the members of Parliament. The Prime Minister (Head of Government) can be booted out of office through a “vote of no confidence, not impeachment.”

Putting in place some preconditions

But before all of these must come to pass, and during the actual revision of the 1987 Constitution, the Centrist Democratic Party (CDP) and its political institute (CDPI) proposes three steps:

Step 1. Put in place now four critical preconditions: initiate electoral reforms; write in the revised constitution a self-executory anti-political dynasty provision; pass a real freedom of information law(FOI); but more importantly pass the Political Party Development and Financing Act (a bill pending in Congress for several years now, HB 49, 403, and 159). The latter will penalize “turncoatism,” (or the switching of political parties); and enforce transparent mechanisms to regulate and eliminate corruption and patronage—removing dependence of candidates on big corporate and individual contributors—through state subsidies that will professionalize political parties by supporting their political education and campaign initiatives.

Step 2. Right after the plebiscite in May 2019, transit immediately into a parliamentary government, also known as “party government” because of the pivotal role of political parties. The “newness” of this governmental form may take more time for calibration for our institutions and our leaders to acclimatize to this new political regimen.

Step 3. Parliament allows the provinces and highly urbanized component cities to evolve first to an “autonomous territory.” “Self-determination” is central to this decision. Government can’t impose on the body politic the territories that will eventually become states in a federal format. Provinces and cities need to negotiate as to actual territories and population to encompass a bigger state; the considerations of the natural resources and wealth; the similarity of customs and language; and even the seat of the state capitals. Some of the provinces and cities will be ahead of the pack and some will be laggards so the development of a federated republic will not be uniform. All these need time and with guidance from parliament.

 

By the time the President steps down in 2022, the parliamentary government will be in place. The head of government will be chosen by virtue of the political party majority or through party coalitions. The president or head of state will be elected from among the members of parliament.

And we will be well on our way to a federal form of government.
Published in LML Polettiques
Page 2 of 2