Fourth of a series

TOMES have been written about the superiority of a federal-parliamentary system to the unitary-presidential form that we have now. We advocate federal-parliamentary as an alternative. All Filipino presidents understood the imperatives for systemic changes from the very start of their rule, only to falter somewhere in the course of their administrations when personal political interests or the vested interest of their patrons were threatened.

Without delving into lengthy arguments reinforcing the relative superiority of federal-parliamentary, I am reprinting my updated column, "Federal-parliamentary vs unitary-presidential system" (The Manila Times, June 15, 2022). The lists of countries lifted from the 2024 Corruption Perception Index (CPI) by Transparency International show compelling statistics of corrupt countries with their corresponding system of governments.

10 most corrupt, least transparent countries

1. Somalia – federal parliamentary; 2. Venezuela – federal presidential; 3. Syria - authoritarian presidential; 4. South Sudan – federal presidential; 5. Yemen – presidential; 6. North Korea - totalitarian presidential; 7. Nicaragua - authoritarian presidential; 8. Haiti – presidential; 9. Equatorial Guinea – presidential; 10. Turkmenistan – presidential.

Nine of the above are under a presidential system. Only Somalia has a federal-parliamentary government.

10 least peaceful nations

1. Yemen – presidential; 2. Sudan - federal presidential; 3. South Sudan - federal presidential; 4. Afghanistan – presidential; 5. Ukraine – presidential; 6. Democratic Republic of the Congo – presidential; 7. Russia – federal presidential; 8. Syria – presidential; 9. Israel – parliamentary; 10. Mali – presidential.

Of this list, nine have presidential forms, and only Israel is parliamentary. Similarly, of the nations with the highest terrorism index, six have presidential governments — Mali, Syria, Afghanistan, Nigeria, Myanmar and Niger; and four — Burkina Faso, Israel, Pakistan and Somalia — have a combination of parliamentary-semi-presidential governments.

10 least corrupt nations

By contrast, Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Canada and Germany are the world's top 10 "least corrupt" nations. All have parliamentary systems although Singapore had a strong prime minister in Lee Kwan Yew, the founding leader. Include in this list the United States, Australia and Ireland. Only the US, among them, adopts a federal presidential form.

15 most prosperous nations

Finally, in the list of the top 15 most prosperous nations (Norway, Switzerland, Denmark, New Zealand, Sweden, Canada, Australia, Netherlands, Finland, Ireland, United States, Iceland, Luxembourg, Germany and the United Kingdom), all are parliamentary governments, except the US' federal-presidential.

Empirical evidence clearly indicates that a parliamentary government is superior to a presidential system and suggests further that a federal trumps a unitary system.

President Macoy understood this too well, instituting parliamentary government in the 1973 Marcos Constitution, which was abrogated by President Cory, substituting her 1987 Constitution, which enshrined a presidential-unitary system.

Path toward change — fed-parl govt

Only through the revision of the 1987 Constitution can a federal-parliamentary system be installed. But going through the three modes of constitutional revision and amendments — people's initiative (PI), constituent assembly (ConAss) or a constitutional convention (ConCon) – any of these modes must involve the acts of a disgraceful legislature. This has been attempted several times in the last three decades. The legislature even refuses to pass laws against political dynasties — acting against their interest — although proscribed in the 1987 Cory Constitution. Systemic change is thus impossible through this legal process.

My recent columns suggested sane people in the military act to break the impasse and take control of the desperate situation we find ourselves in. I suggested that "perhaps we need a shogun – a temporary one along the lines of an FVR." Some of my readers, like Agnes Marcella L. "...doubts that military intervention would do much to significantly alter the status quo (as) the system (itself) would devour them just the same. (It's) such a big gamble because who in the military has the gravitas to direct the country in that direction without being co-opted in the process? I highly doubt constitutional changes rank high in the minds of these men in uniform."

She is partly right, as the events that unfolded leading toward the 1986 EDSA People Power uprising abetted by a military component would suggest. The civilian government, led by President Cory, mandated to enact a new constitution instead, emerged with one negating the seeds of systemic changes and reverted to the old and familiar and utterly anomalous. The adoption of a parliamentary government, which was the original intent of her constituencies, was aborted, and a unitary presidential system of government, with all its inherent iniquities, was retained.

Thus, signaling the start of the recapture of the EDSA People Power by the remnants of the old regime, the old oligarchy and her new oligarchy, the "kamag-anak," later co-opted with the emergence of the Estradas, the Macapagals, the Aquinos and the Dutertes, retaining the old values resulting in the continuation of the practices of traditional politics and the proliferation of political dynasties. The fulfillment of the promises of people power cum military component eventually failed, paving the way for the return of the very family that was booted out in 1986 — the Marcos-Romualdez clan. And the narratives of a dysfunctional system continue to plague the land.

EDSA version 2.0

We need to learn from its failures in 1983-1986 when the civilian and uniformed components did not work in sync after the assassination of Ninoy when the political atmosphere was ripe for change. We have similar conditions today exacerbated by the impunity of our political leadership. Former generals and retired military personnel are voicing out their frustrations directed toward the political leadership, calling for their removal. These are allies possessing the right kind of expertise. Civic society needs to reach out to them for a dialogue arriving at commonalities for a systemic change.

This is a desperate solution and one fraught with risks. But with the trajectory, we find ourselves in an executive branch complicit with a shameless legislature, with the judiciary inutile –our complacency condemns us toward perdition.

Another of my readers posits the idea that you only need to choose the right leaders. John Raña argues that "Philippine politics has long been framed as a battle between rival families or a choice between the lesser evil—a false narrative that traps the nation in a cycle of failed leadership. The challenge now is to reject recycled names and demand real leadership. The right leader will not come from dynasties but from the ashes of their failures." John's thesis is that corruption in government is the root cause of the country's pressing problems, and a good president who truly can defeat corruption will not only clean up government but also restore trust in leadership. This is a palliative. Corruption is a symptom of systemic dysfunctions.

No doubt, a decent president is a must. But the fallacy of these arguments has been exposed several generations back. Tongue in cheek, it has been advanced too that even if Jesus Christ sits on top of our Philippine government structure, he will fail. The system will eat him alive.

Kingdom Keepers, a coalition of concerned citizens, is calling for a mass indignation rally on Jan. 31 at the EDSA Shrine. I will be there. This could be the beginning of...

Second of a series

WITH the passage of the 2025 budget, dubbed as the most corrupt budget ever, it is now apparent that this country is led by criminals in the highest echelons of government — the executive and legislative branches. They have, in one fell swoop, done away with the concept of "checks and balances," the main feature of good governance. The separation of powers, the hallmark of our democracy enshrined in our 1935 and 1987 constitutions, has been reduced to a parody by our political leadership.

Consider the following: the legislative branch, made up of the two houses — the Senate and the House of Representatives — to make and amend laws. They also have the "power of the purse" to allocate funds for specific purposes through the passage of appropriate laws. In short, it oversees and controls the spending of the executive branch — the presidency, which includes the Office of the Vice President, the OVP, the president's nemesis.

The executive recommends spending proposals to Congress to align with its power to enforce laws and command the military. Metaphorically, this is equivalent to the "power of the sword;" its role is to take action to protect the nation from harm.

Independent branches — a fallacy

What, in fact, transpired was that the legislative branch has allowed the bicameral conference committee (bicam) to purportedly reconcile conflicting provisions to formulate a totally different allocation protocol, employing opaque budgetary practices characterized by a lack of transparency and accountability.

One glaring example is the equivalent of the unconstitutional "pork barrel," something they can divvy up among themselves. This is the generous P26 billion "Ayuda sa Kapos ang Kita Program" (AKAP) funds, the House speaker's brainchild, the use of which is intended to catapult him to the presidency in 2028.

Over the Senate's initial objections, P5 billion bought the silence of the senators, and the balance of P21 billion satisfying the greed of the lower house, courtesy of the bicam, an entity that does not even appear in the Constitution. But it acts with impunity where decisions are concocted in the proverbial "smoke-filled rooms." And in a subsequent "moro-moro" of a purported line-item veto, President Marcos, complicit to this travesty, left this pork intact in the budget.

Midterm elections 2025

With this connivance, we can expect the Marcos-Romualdez cabal to have the logistics stolen from the people to get their political allies elected in the local government units, which consequently will impact the choice of district representatives. This is crucial to the ambition of Martin Romualdez as he needs to retain his speakership as a springboard to the presidency in 2028.

The incoming Senate could present a different scenario. Their being elected nationwide places them in a near equivalent status to the presidency. Traditionally the launch pad to the presidency, the Marcos-Romualdez cabal needs to buy their fealty.

Of the 12 chosen Marcos-Romualdez 2025 SEnate candidates, five incumbent re-electionists have a fair chance of making it — the fourth termers Pia Cayetano, Lito Lapid and Bong Revilla. So, too, Imee Marcos and Francis Tolentino on their first full term.

Add to this list the possible return of three "same old, same old," Tito Sotto already on his fifth senatorial run, Panfilo Lacson on his fourth and Manny Pacquiao on his second. These eight senators out of 12 get Marcos-Romualdez a third of the 2025 Senate.

But the betting is that the Senate institution will further be debased with the entrance of two Tulfo siblings, completing a family of three: Raffy, Erwin and Ben. We currently have two sets of siblings, the Cayetanos and Ejercito/Estrada, and a mother/son, Cynthia and Mark Villar. On the wings are children and siblings-substitutes indecently waiting. Before long, this chamber will soon be dominated by political dynasties and family clans.

Cries of protests

On Jan. 13, citizens from all walks of life gathered to protest this impunity and massive plunder of the people's coffers. The Iglesia Ni Kristo (INK) called for its membership nationwide to show indignation under the guise of peace rallies. But trolls have also been inundating social media depicting this show of force as anti-Marcos and pro-Sara Duterte — which INK has belied.

On the other hand, similar rallies, particularly in the bailiwick of the Dutertes, are being held, but with a twist — to champion the cause of their family, particularly the VP and pointedly anti-Marcos, diverting the people from the family's own misdeeds.

Nevertheless, all these could be in response to what former Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio declared in his social media postings: "...The halls of Congress and the Senate reek of betrayal. This is no longer just a circus — it is a grand heist, a vicious mockery of the Filipino people's sacrifices... our so-called leaders are busy looting not just our wealth but our very dignity. They are no leaders — they are traitors — a ruthless betrayal. Let us not mince words — this is treason. Yet these cowards violated the law with impunity. Our silence makes us complicit. Our silence feeds their arrogance. Why are we not in the streets? Why do we allow these thieves to gut our nation while we watch from the sidelines? Enough is enough. This is no longer about politics — it's about survival."

"But there is hope. We, the people, are the true power of this nation. We can end this betrayal. The time to fight is now. Let our anger be our fuel. Let our indignation spark a revolution of accountability. The question is not if we can fight back. The question is, will we fight back before it's too late?"

Carpio was a veteran of the EDSA People Power (EDSA 1986) that catapulted Cory Aquino to the presidency. Carpio understood the formula that precipitated the downfall of another Marcos in 1986. It worked then. But can this be replicated? Unfortunately, the subsequent EDSA 1986 events reflected Cory's naivete and ignorance and substituted another corrupt government. The goodwill of the hordes of Filipinos clamoring for change was enormously wasted by the "kamag-anak."

Immediate but intermediate solution

All these cries and rallies could amount to nothing, knowing the enormous political power and impunity of the reigning Marcos-Romualdez cabal and their cohorts in government. We need more than mere protest.

At this point, I quote a confidant of President FVR, John Raña's postings on "...the role of the military as the ultimate arbiter of political stability. This is rooted in historical precedent, as the military has played decisive roles in events such as the ouster of Ferdinand Marcos Sr. in 1986 and Joseph Estrada in 2001... the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) is traditionally seen as a guardian of national stability, often stepping in during crises where civilian authority falters."

At this time when the political leadership is led by the corrupt — with very few exceptions — perhaps we need a shogun, a temporary one along the lines of an FVR.

We need the sane people in the military to take control of the situation.

First of a series

IT is traditional to start a new year on a high note, with a new hope for 2025, discarding the year past, its bad memories and upsetting events. I will not adhere to these rituals. I will digress with a bold declaration that 2024 was a bad year, and 2025 could be worse! Today's column is part 1 of a series that will continue to examine the politics of this country and its prospects in the coming year — and beyond.

It is a Filipino cultural attribute to always look for a silver lining behind dark clouds. We are resilient people, kind people, slow to anger and forgiving people. To endure, we must believe that things will look good next year — always, the next year; perhaps to alleviate the pains of the past and relieve the traumas. Thus, we are often taken advantage of by our political leadership. But the tragedy is we keep voting them back to power. Perhaps we really deserve the politicians we elect. We love to be "pa martir, martir."

Meantime, I will have to contradict the Jan. 1 editorial of this paper proclaiming a promising year ahead. "The Manila Times is looking forward with hopeful anticipation. In our view, the Philippines is beginning 2025 with remarkable strength. While we watch other, supposedly more robust democracies... struggle with political stability, we can take some pride that our political system is strong and sound... we must continue to strive to improve the efficiency, transparency, and moral character of our governance."

These words are a mockery of our system of governance, an insult to our people. I am sure my editors are honorable men and women and only have the best interest of the citizenry. But I maintain that our political system is bankrupt, and the moral character of the people who lead us is impoverished.

A bleak 2025

Similarly, Tatad's column, "Annus horribilis 2024" (TMT, Jan. 1, 2025), paraphrases the late Queen Elizabeth II's speech of her 1992 horrible year, when the three marriages of her children broke down, besieged by the relentless attacks of the British press on her family and a fire razing her Windsor Castle. Tatad refers to the natural calamities that devastated our country, killing thousands. But more intriguing was his description of the collapse of the Marcos-Duterte political alliance, condemning the Filipinos to a sad spectacle of the lowest kind of politics polarizing the country and tearing the people apart. He put it succinctly: "We are today a deeply divided nation. And it is the obscene fight for political power that has caused it."

My year-end three columns and my first for 2025 were an attempt at a way out of our centuries-old governance, a systemic anomaly that cried out for a complete political restructuring: "Our dysfunctional system" (Dec. 11, 2024); "The unitary-presidential system" (Dec. 18, 2024); "The parliamentary government" (Dec. 25, 2024); and "Political parties — the need for real ones" (Jan. 1, 2025). These are long-term solutions to what plagues Philippine governance. Not mere palliatives.

Senate/House hearings

In a travesty of justice masquerading as legislative hearings we were confronted with a performance reminding me of an appropriate Latin phrase of my high school years, "corrupti corrupti corrupti corrupti" (the corrupt investigating the corruption of the corrupt!).

These shameless inquisitors flaunting their million-peso Hermes-Birkins, Louis Vuitton, Patek Philippe, Rolexes and bespoke suits — a blasé display of their plunder. These thieves are the sycophants and subalterns of the House speaker, the house Torquemada ever salivating for the presidency succeeding his weak cousin's watch.

And the intended victim was VP Sara, who caused her people to dispense with hundreds of millions of pesos in two weeks and millions more unaccounted-for intelligence funds. And in her defense was her dramatic meltdown and gruesome threat to cut her ally's head off and his father's cadaver dug up and fed to the fish. This was a clever display of bizarre theater diverting the people from her own venality.

We are entertained by the intermittent meddling of the former president, accused of killing innocent lives during his presidency, covering his tracks as the "capo di tutti capi" — the drug lord eliminating the competition through his "EJK." And in the process seemingly protecting his congressman son's alleged involvement in the shipment of illegal drugs — in cahoots with the so-called Davao Mafia — a slur to Davaoeños. All these allegations, facts, plots and counterplots surfaced during these "hearings in aid of legislation."

And these, as we and other columnists have written ad nauseam, are the consequences of the fight between two powerful political dynasties. The Marcoses and the Dutertes are in a death struggle with the advantage to the former which is in possession of the legitimate tools handed to it by this dysfunctional system of governance — the budget process. And we are all caught in the middle, bamboozled to take sides.

The budget

The criminals in both congressional houses have employed as their weapon a legitimate tool, illegitimately framed — the P6.326 trillion "election budget," distorted by the complicit "third house" of Congress, the bicameral conference committee (bicam), reshaping the president's budget by changing its priorities, belying his proclamation that his budget was devoid of opportunities for corruption. Consider the following:

A failed attempt to slash the education budget, which constitutionally was to have the biggest slice; nevertheless, undermining its priorities with an accounting trickery to include the budgets of the Public Safety College, the PMA and the PNP Academy — bureaucracies irrelevant to the education department, to reach a figure of P1.055 trillion.

Increasing the DPWH's budget by an additional P263.9 billion to P1.007 trillion, the traditional milking cow of congressmen for various infrastructure projects in their districts — a lucrative source for corruption, leakages and rent-seeking commissions.

The defunding of PhilHealth's subsidy jeopardizes the sustainability of health care services and universal health coverage — endangering access by the poor and the indigent.

And the mother of scams, the P26 billion lump sum for the Ayuda sa Kapos ang Kita Program (AKAP) — the surreptitious congressional insertions similar to the unconstitutional "pork barrel" — with their graft and kickbacks built in. Nominally under the DSWD, Romualdez has become its face and the main beneficiary, together with his minions, for these election dole-outs.

And to neutralize the Senate objections, bribe the senators with P5 billion from AKAP — on top of the additional allotment of P1 billion to the Senate and P18 billion to the House budgets — with no justifications for the increases whatsoever, except that this is an election year.

To rub salt in the wound, Sara's OVP budget was cut by nearly two-thirds to P733 million. With her imminent impeachment, this could be the beginning of her political castration.

This budget could be the most corrupt in our country's history; except that we may still have the same dramatis personae after the 2025 elections as a result.

If this is the type of political system described by this paper's editorial as strong and sound, where our leadership holds the high ground, observing transparency bolstered by their moral character, then we are an accursed people!

May God/Allah help us!

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)