IN the previous two columns, we made a case for a transition to a parliamentary government from the unitary presidential one that we've had since the birth of our republic.
Today's article is a response to last week's treatise on the need for real political parties under a parliamentary government in contrast to what we have under a unitary presidential system. I quote from the Centrist Democrats (CD) manuals (www.cdpi.asia, CDP/CDM/CDPI):
"Political parties are the primary vehicles to gain political power by engaging themselves in political contests, primarily elections. The members and their leadership are expected to adhere to a set of principles and strategies written in a platform unique to that party. This espousal of a vision of governance defines the ideological identity of that party — and therefore, the electorate must be permitted a patent choice as to who must govern them based on what the candidates and their respective parties stand for."
It is unfortunate that our dysfunctional political system breeds the type of traditional politics that permeates political parties where the fundamental consideration is political survival of its elective members and preservation of its pelf and privileges based on the oppressive tyranny of numbers — the more elective people in power the better, notwithstanding the quality of its leadership or purity of purpose. Thus, the dictum "politics is addition" becomes an aberration. Elections based simply on candidates' popularity and their winnability trump ideological perspectives. Political parties therefore are forced to recruit actors, athletes and entertainment personalities already popular with the masses, relegating political creed, principles and their beliefs to the back burner. The electorate is thus blamed for their choices perpetuating another anomalous dictum, "one deserves the government one votes into power" as the dysfunctional system precludes real choices and debates on issues, condemning the voters to perpetual ignorance. (TMT, Aug. 25. 2021)
A great percentage of successful politically stable governments with thriving economies adopted parliamentary governments (Germany, Great Britain, the Nordic countries, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Malaysia, etc.). We are extracting features that the Philippines could adapt.
Parties must be member-based
"Political parties as in any organization need warm bodies, advocating shared interest, expanding growth of adherents and voters, as means for eventual political control. These activities require logistics from a diversity of sources. Membership dues are the obvious main source. In the Philippines, political party members seldom pay dues. Therefore, they have no real stake in them. The real stakeholders are the financiers.
"Building solid finances principally from members and like-minded allies, and instituting transparent financial management can free the membership from dependence and control of a few rich personalities within.
Off-election season activities
"The reality on the ground is that political parties are only active during election season. Off-season, they tend to 'hibernate.' Ideally in between campaign periods, elected representatives must conduct continuous dialogue with the people and the institutions that govern them. Representatives need constant feedback from citizens so they may understand changing realities on the ground. Throughout each year, their political parties should organize projects and activities, advocacies and internal training sessions with its members participating actively.
"They need to strictly exercise internal democratic procedures, from inception and execution of programs and activities to the selection of their leaders or the nomination of candidates for public offices.
"They need to impose party discipline, not allowing their leaders or elected representatives in public offices to contradict party policy decisions, except in rare cases of personal conscience-driven issues.
"The party must have its own rules for its members to abide by and should be the training ground for the leaders of the country.
"Consequently, only parties which are member-based, possessing internal democratic structures and procedures, and clear program orientation should be permitted to field candidates for elections. These should all be covered by law.
Reforms needed
"To enforce the desired profile of real political parties, we need immediate reforms in our political party system short of the 1987 constitutional revisions. Meantime, these reforms can be achieved through the passing of the proposed Political Party Development and Financing Act (a bill that has been pending in Congress for several years) which will:
"1. Penalize 'turncoatism' (or the switching of political parties, 'balimbing,' 'political butterfly') and expulsion from elective public offices and party membership if their acts are deemed inimical to party principles.
"2. Enforce transparent mechanisms providing and regulating campaign financing to eliminate graft, corruption and patronage (corporate and individual contributions).
"3. Institute strict state subsidy that will professionalize political parties by supporting their political education and campaign initiatives (currently being done in European countries)." (TMT, July 21, 2021)
Party-list concept
"At that time, the appointed Constitutional Commission (1987 ConCom) was for a shift to a parliamentary form of government from a presidential system. The framers looked up to some European models, particularly the German parliament composed of elected members from the parliamentary districts (like our congressmen), plus those chosen (the party-list) by the political parties themselves on the basis of 'proportional representation' according to the votes each party obtained in the preceding elections.
"For example, each political party during elections will draw a 'party-list' composed of and meant to give voice to the sector that is marginalized or underrepresented inside the legislature. This includes groups such as labor, peasant, urban poor, veterans, Indigenous people communities, women, youth, differently abled, except the religious sector. They are not meant to be elected independent of or outside of the political parties vying for power but as part of the political party itself.
Party-list perversion, Philippine-style
"The heavily elitist framers of the 1987 Constitution that President Cory Auino appointed did not enact the shift to a parliamentary government and instead preserved the presidential system but retained the party-list provisions. Our current party-list system therefore is an anomaly, a mongrelized German/European version where anyone can form a political party of single issues and register as a party-list. Thus, the proliferation of party-lists of athletes, security guards, market vendors, teachers, etc. — those strictly not the envisioned marginalized sector of Philippine society.
"This opened the floodgates to relatives of sitting elective officials, including wives and concubines, etc., or as temporary dumping ground for election losers. To qualify for a seat, a party-list group must receive at least 2 percent of the total valid votes cast nationally for party-list candidates. Voters cast their votes for both district representatives (naming specific candidates) and only one party-list (with unnamed candidates) on the same ballot.
"The total number of party-list seats is set at 20 percent of the total membership of the House of Representatives. The allocation of these seats is done using a formula based on the number of votes received by each party-list group, ensuring that representation is proportional to the votes garnered.
"The party-list system originally aimed to enhance the representation of marginalized and underrepresented sectors in the legislative process, allowing them to have a voice in governance, is now the bastion of political dynasties.
"These twin evils of the unitary presidential system of government, party-lists and political dynasties, are the political legacy of President Cory Aquino, embedded in the 1987 Constitution." (TMT, May 18, 2022)
000