TRANSFORMING
OUR UNITARY SYSTEM
TO A FEDERAL SYSTEM:
A Pragmatic, Developmental Approach
By Jose V. Abueva
Professor Emeritus of Public
Administration and Political Science
Center
for Leadership, Citizenship and Democracy
National College of Public Administration and Governance
University of the Philippines Diliman
As I originally intended, this paper was written
to provoke discussion and reflection on a radical
alternative to the traditional unitary structure
of the Filipino political system. I present ideas
for transforming our unitary political system into
a federal one in two stages that would take ten
years to bring about, from 2000 to 2010. Instead
of making the change in a rush, as some advocate,
I believe in a ten-year transition as in the Philippine
Commonwealth that prepared the nation for independence
from 1935 to 1946. The decade of transition will
also allow us the time to carefully examine various
other ideas for constitutional change being proposed
and act on them together instead of piecemeal. Overall,
I have in mind the medium and long-term prospects
of our country’s democratic political evolution
as a heavily populated, developing country that
wants badly to industrialize and modernize in order
to achieve higher levels of human, social and economic
development that is also sustainable.
Meanwhile,
we have to accelerate the process of government
decentralization under the 1987 Constitution both
ways: by de-concentrating national government administration
from Metro Manila to the regional centers and by
devolving more national government functions to
the local government units through continuing amendments
to the Local Government Code of 1991. At the same
time, we have to reorient our people away from their
traditional and forced dependence on the national
government, toward greater self-reliance and responsibility
through local governance and development, including
developing their capacity to raise more local revenues
and generate funding for local development, and
to attract investments.
If
we can make the political transformation steadily
and successfully, we would be able to end the stifling
centralized unitary structure in the 1987 Constitution
and in earlier constitutions and during Spanish
and American colonial rule. Then we shall be better
able to unify, strengthen and develop the Philippines
as a pluralistic nation and the Republic as a functional
and democratic political system. Our political development,
socio-economic development, and cultural development
will be mutually reinforcing and sustainable. As
I shall reiterate in this paper the shift from a
unitary political system to a federal one in itself
is not a panacea to solve all our problems. But
it will help to catalyze new solutions to many of
them.
For
the first stage of reform, legislation would be
necessary to group together the existing 15 administrative
regions into 10 larger “socio-economic”
regions that would prepare them for their eventual
transformation into states in a federal system.
After a decade of valuable, practical experience
in this “new regionalization,” the time
will come for the second stage: the actual shift
to a federal system by constitutional amendment
or revision beginning about 2008.
Later
in the paper I present a theory of federalization:
its form in outline, its justification, and its
expected outcomes
I. IMPLEMENTING PROPOSALS FOR FURTHER DECENTRALIZATION
AND LOCAL AUTONOMY IN OUR PRESENT UNITARY SYSTEM
OF GOVERNMENT
Given
the goals of the basic reforms I am advocating,
I support the views and proposals of legislative,
local government, and academic experts for incremental
reform and improvement of our unitary system of
government in the next decade. For example, there
is House Bill No. 7845 introduced by Representative
Romeo D.C. Candazo, chairman of the House Committee
on Local Government. The bill proposes several amendments
to the Local Government Code of 1991 in order to
extend and strengthen the devolution of powers and
the deconcentration of administration to local government
units, and to provide additional sources of funding
for local programs, services and activities. Senator
Aquilino Pimentel, chairman of the Senate Committee
on Local Government and principal author of the
Local Government Code of 1991, has been proposing
significant amendments to enhance local autonomy
within our unitary system of government and has
held consultations around the country.
In
his paper, “Current Issues and Emerging Trends
in Local Autonomy,” Alberto C. Agra, legal
consultant to the League of Municipalities, examines
recent policies and jurisprudence and explores proposals
for policy reforms and possible changes in the Constitution.
He takes a liberal and progressive position on several
issues of local autonomy and recommends giving local
governments various kinds of resources. In his response
to the author’s request, Rodolfo V. Vicerra,
deputy-director of the Congressional Planning and
Budget Office, is critical of the performance of
the national government and the Autonomous Region
of Muslim Mindanao in our centralized unitary system.
He recommends giving more powers to local governments
and strongly favors changing to a federal system.
Based
on the PHILCONSA studies in 1968-1971, Salvador
Araneta proposed in 1981 “The Bayanikasan
Constitution for the Federal Republic of the Philippines,”
a 110-page draft. Also in the 1980s, Gabriel U.
Iglesias and Rizal G. Buendia, scholars at the U.P.
College of Public Administration, proposed federalism
in lieu of our unitary system. Some of their ideas
are cited in this paper. The title of Buendia’s
article in the Philippine Journal of Public Administration
is “The Prospects of Federalism in the Philippines:
A Challenge of Political Decentralization of the
Unitary State” (April, 1989).
I
recognize that the liberal and vigorous application
of the local autonomy principle in the 1987 Constitution
contains the germ of federalism. This is in the
sense that the constant push for local autonomy--with
its successes and frustrations in various parts
of the country--encourages local government leaders
as well as national leaders to open their minds
to the possibility of going the full length of structural
transformation into a federal government. In fact,
former Cagayan de Oro mayor and assemblyman Ruben
Canoy has renewed his call for Mindanao autonomy
and Moro autonomy within it, in a Philippine federation
instead of his earlier advocacy of an independent
Mindanao. Several senators have proposed federalism
as a structural solution to the Moro secessionist
movement in Mindanao. In November 2000, advocates
of federalism are meeting in Cebu to formally launch
a national movement for federalism.
Most
advocates of federalism want to call a constitutional
convention for the purpose as soon as practicable.
However, I firmly believe in a deliberate and practical,
experimental approach to federation. We should begin
by first regrouping or amalgamating our many existing
administrative regions into ten or so larger administrative
or socio-economic regions and granting their local
governments more substantial autonomy as “proto
states”of an emergent federation.
II. FIRST STAGE: A NEW REGIONALIZATION
AS A TRANSITION TO A FEDERAL POLITICAL SYSTEM
In
the present unitary government structure, all local
government units are political and territorial subdivisions
of the Republic. These are under the general or
direct supervision of the President of the Philippines.
Congress may grant varying degrees of local autonomy
to local government units as mandated in the 1987
Constitution This is may be done through one of
two forms of decentralization. By devolution certain
powers and functions of the national government
may be transferred to the local government units
(political autonomy). By deconcentration the national
government may delegate authority and functions
to its field offices and to local governments (administrative
autonomy).
In
the first or transitional stage of my proposed structural
reform, it is proposed that Congress authorize the
regrouping of existing administrative regions into
seven larger administrative regions which may be
called Socio-Economic Regions, to distinguish them
from their component administrative regions. (See
Box No. 1. “Possible Socio-Economic Regions”
as “Proto-States.”). Within the existing
unitary system, each of them shall be given substantial
administrative autonomy through deconcentration
and much more local autonomy through devolution.
Congress
may want to begin the reforms in the "leading
economic zones or growth centers," such as
CALABARZON; BULACAN-PAMPANGA-SBMA-Clark-TARLAC;
PANGASINAN-LA-UNION; METRO CEBU AND ENVIRONS; CAGAYAN-DE-ORO-ILIGAN;
and DAVAO-GENSAN. These areas have shown their resources,
leadership and capacity for accelerated development.
The
purpose of the transitional reforms is to remove
the expendable legal and administrative constraints
on the enterprise, initiative and resourcefulness
of regional and local leaders and local governments
and businesses, in their push for industrialization
and/or agricultural development. Or, more positively,
to encourage them to intensify their efforts in
attracting investments and industries to their areas,
in engaging and empowering the people in the common
endeavor for development, and in generating additional
revenues to enable the economic regions to provide
more and better public goods and services.
The
special policies and administrative arrangements
that have been devised for the present Special Economic
Zones and the Export Processing Zones may be adapted
and further enhanced as incentives to the selected
“economic zones.” These would give them
additional capacities for accelerated development.
The important point is to introduce creative experimentation
in policymaking, governance, public administration
and development, instead of habitually adhering
to the bureaucratic principles of uniformity and
standardization and controls that tend to stifle
the imagination and frustrate innovation. The grant
of special powers and autonomy to the “socio-economic
regions” shall include more taxing, fund-raising,
and borrowing powers. They should also be empowered
to deal with those who might abuse their expanded
powers, for the success of the new regionalization
hinges on the competence, honesty and integrity
of the regional and local government leaders.
In
concluding his comprehensive review of local autonomy
issues and trends in our present unitary system,
Alberto C. Agra says:
The
bottom line is increasing the resources of local
governments. These resources…are:
1.
Political Resources, by pursuing the principle of
subsidiarity, promoting democratization, advancing
the agency and stewardship role of local governments;
2.
Financial Resources, by broadening the revenue base
of and recognizing the fiscal autonomy of local
governments;
3.
Information Resources, by applying rules of strict
accountabilities, facilitating access to records
and policy instruments and participating in regular
dialogues and consultations;
4.
Legal and Constitutional Resources, by advocating
for the liberal view of municipal powers, pushing
for broad self-governance, formalizing separation
of powers at the local level, defining the role
of the courts, expanding the constitutional powers
of local governments, creating the environment for
federalism: and
5.
Hierarchical Resource, by adhering to policies on
legislative control and executive suprvision, understanding
and operationalizing local autonomy at various levels
and resolving conflicts in favor of integration
and local solidarity.
To
reiterate, the first phase in the reforms I am advocating
would take ten years to undertake, from 2000 to
2010. As valuable experience is being gained in
the practical experiment in selective empowerment
of the leading “socio-economic zones”
and then of all the “socio-economic regions,”
we shall also examine more closely the prospects
for federalization, and work out the important details
of shifting from our unitary government to a federal
government.
We
should study and learn from the many variants among
the 40 or so federal governments in the world and
also from the semi-federal unitary systems. Among
the leading federations whose features may be adapted
are the United States, Canada, Australia, Germany,
India, and Malaysia. Much can also be learned from
such “semi-federal unitary systems”
as Spain and the People’s Republic of China
that have special autonomous political regions.
III. SECOND STAGE: THE SHIFT TO A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
UNDER AN AMENDED OR NEW CONSTITUTION
In
the second stage of the proposed reforms, beginning
in 2010, the Republic of the Philippines will become
a federation under an amended or new Constitution.
The Constitution will specifically divide political
powers and functions between the federal or national
government on the one hand, and the seven states
and their local authorities on the other. In the
constitutional division of powers and functions,
their exercise may be shared (concurrent or interlocked)
by the two levels of government, or they may be
performed only either by the federal government
or by the state and local governments (exclusive).
The
federal or national government shall retain certain
exclusive national powers and functions. Among these
are national policy, planning and legislation; national
security and defense; foreign relations; the monetary
system; the federal appellate courts of justice;
national commissions for civil service, elections,
and audit; federal grants-in-aid to the states for
development and for redistribution; and initiating
changes in the Constitution.
The
federal or national government shall exercise concurrent
powers and functions with the states in such fields
as science and technology development; education,
health and welfare; environmental protection; housing
and urban development; agricultural development;
trade and industry; transportation and communication;
protection of labor and workmen’s compensation;
and national culture and the arts.
All
other powers and functions not reserved exclusively
for the federal government shall belong to the states
and their component local governments. States and
their local authorities shall be given certain powers
of taxation, fund-raising and borrowing that shall
not be subject to the infringement of the federal
Executive and Congress, and may be curtailed only
when abused as determined by the federal appellate
courts.
The
federation shall have a presidential form of government
with a nationally elected president and vice-president
of the Republic. It shall have a bicameral federal
Congress of not more than about 200 members to enact
laws for the whole country. Three senators shall
be elected by the voters in each of the ten states
to represent those states in the Congress. The rest
of the legislators, the representatives, shall be
elected by the voters in the congressional districts
to represent the people. For economy and efficiency,
the federal government shall be down-sized because
a number of its functions will be devolved to the
states, or shared with them.
The
federal government shall help ensure the balanced
and equitable development of the whole country and
the welfare of all Filipino citizens, especially
the poor, the needy and disadvantaged. This is to
say that national redistribution of resources and
welfare is a major function of the federal government,
while the states are to be the engines of economic
and social development and the main provider of
social services and public safety (Peterson:viii;
187-195).
As
suggested earlier on, it is proposed that the federation
shall have ten states. These are (1) Metro Manila,
the National Capital; (2) Northern Luzon, (3) Cordillera
(4) Central Luzon, (5) Southern Tagalog, (6) Bicol-Samar,
(7) Visayas-Palawan, (8) Western Mindanao, (9) Bangsa
Moro, and (10) Eastern Mindanao. The states and
their local governments would comprise and represent
contiguous or adjacent territory and the various
ethno-linguistic groups of Filipinos. Metro Manila
shall be the national capital and the site of the
federal government. .(See Map of the Ten States
of the Proposed Federation.)
The
various local governments shall be consolidated
and integrated within the states and their further
fragmentation shall be prohibited in the Constitution.
Each state shall elect its governor and vice-governor.
It shall have a compact unicameral legislature,
the State Assembly, whose members shall be elected
in the component provinces and cities. The State
Assembly shall select the location of the state
capital. The state governments and local governments
within them shall be lean and their bureaucracy
simplified to achieve economy, efficiency, and responsiveness,
and to allocate the bulk of their resources to public
services and development rather than to salaries
and pensions.
As
the national capital, Metro Manila shall have a
unified metropolitan government headed by its elected
governor and legislative assembly to deal with problems
affecting the whole metropolis and relations with
adjacent states. Consistent with this unified and
coordinated governance, the local governments in
the metropolis shall administer their jurisdictions
with a measure of local autonomy and meaningful
citizen participation. Other metropolitan areas
may adapt the unified, two-tier structure of governance
of Metro Manila.
In
the federal system envisioned, all elected national,
state and local leaders shall serve a term of four
years, and all elections shall be synchronized.
This is intended for economy and to encourage the
development of nation-wide political parties that
will campaign for the election of their candidates
at all levels on the basis of their ideologies and
programs of government, and involve citizens actively
in the political process. A strong and stable party
system is conducive to the operation of a federal
system. This does not preclude the establishment
of regional and local parties.
Accordingly,
it is proposed that the constitutional change for
federalization shall also include the change of
the term of office of the President and Vice-President
from the present six years without reelection to
a term of four years with one reelection, or a total
of eight consecutive years of service. This would
be a return to the presidential term under the amended
1935 Constitution. Moreover, there shall be “block
voting” for the President and the Vice-President
in order to promote party unity and accountability.
The election of three senators by each state will
ensure equitable representation of the 10 states
in the Senate.
It
is proposed that the Constitution be amended or
revised so as to begin electing the President and
Vice-President, the senators and representatives,
and all other elected leaders in 2010. This shall
also be the time when the proposed federal system
will begin to take effect.
In
practice, the amendments or revision of the Constitution
should be completed sometime in 2008-2009. They
should then be ratified by the people in a plebiscite
held for the purpose also in 2009. The whole decade
would allow the nation ample time to undergo the
transition stage of building the enlarged administrative
regions and giving them substantial autonomy as
“proto-states,” and then preparing the
federalization scheme and the specific constitutional
changes to be submitted for the people’s ratification.
IV. A THEORY OF PHILIPPINE FEDERALIZATION:
WHY SHIFT FROM A UNITARY SYSTEM TO A FEDERAL SYSTEM
Here
I present hypotheses forming a theory of enhancing
national development through a basic change in the
structure of government; namely the shift from the
centralized unitary system to the proposed federal
system. My theory is related to specific conditions
that political theorists have associated with the
origins and maintenance of federations. A general
argument and supporting statements are offered for
discussion and debate and further serious study.
The proposal or theory is not dogmatic. It is tentative,
partial and open. Nor is the proposed federal system
intended as a panacea that can solve most of the
nation’s complex problems.
It
is simply argued and hypothesized that federalism--one
major independent variable or condition, together
with other independent variables or conditions—is
likely to produce a number of desirable outcomes
(the dependent variables) for the country and the
people. Here are the hypotheses as elements of a
theory for the proposed federal system.
1.
National unification of the Filipinos who belong
to distinctive ethno-linguistic groups and their
significant common experience in democratic political
development have laid the basis for further decentralization,
local autonomy and devolution of the centralized
unitary nation-state that make federalism feasible.
It
is recognized that centralized government during
Spanish and American colonial rule and since independence
in 1946 contributed to the unification of the various
ethno-linguistic groups in the archipelago into
a national political community: the Filipino nation.
Spanish misrule that had fomented many revolts led
to the Propaganda Movement for reforms and to the
Filipino Revolution of 1896 and the founding of
the Filipino nation-state we call the first Philippine
Republic. Under American colonial rile, guided Filipino
self-government through representative institutions,
the President of the Commonwealth, the national
administration, the judiciary and local governments
hastened national unification and enlarged the capacity
of the Filipinos for governing an independent nation-state.
However, the political system did not fully accommodate
the interests and welfare of Muslim Filipinos and
other ethnic minorities.
Filipino
national unification and political development have
been further enhanced by the people’s experience
in democratic governance and development since independence
in 1946. This includes rehabilitation and institution-building
after World War II, the destruction of democratic
institutions under the Marcos authoritarian rule,
the overthrow of the dictatorship in the EDSA Revolution,
and the process of re-democratization, local autonomy,
and devolution under the 1987 Constitution. The
latter is testimony to the nation’s resolve
to improve the democratic political system. The
adoption of Filipino as the national language and
an official language, and its diffusion and use
nationwide as the indigenous lingua franca, is a
sign of the degree of national unification that
has been achieved, despite many other continuing
problems.
2.
The persistence of massive poverty and underdevelopment,
and the problems associated with them, in a populous
country with a rapid rate of population growth,
makes it difficult to achieve substantial and equitable
development. These conditions point to the need
for basic structural changes in the society and
the political system, including federalism, that
could greatly increase the capacity of the government
and the people to deal with those problems.
With
a population of some 75 million, the Philippines
is the 14th most populous country in the world.
Continued centralized governance of such a large,
dispersed population from a distant national capital
inhibits the people’s meaningful and effective
participation in governmental decision-making and
public affairs affecting their lives. Federalism
is one of those structural changes that can better
involve the people in democratic governance, unleash
their creative energies, enhance their enterprise,
productivity, and competitiveness, and hold the
government accountable to the citizenry.
Despite
decades of government development programs from
the center, upwards of 60 percent of Filipinos periodically
classify themselves as poor and official statistics
support their perception. Hunger, malnutrition and
disease, educational problems, low incomes and considerable
unemployment abound, although human development
indices show improvements in longevity, literacy,
and per capita incomes since 1990. Growing numbers
of people are without land and decent homes. So
much inequality and inequity mark the distribution
of family incomes and wealth.
Large
numbers of Filipinos seek employment overseas because
the pace of industrialization and development cannot
create enough jobs locally. The Philippines is having
a hard time building global competitiveness. Neighboring
countries tend to attract more direct foreign investments.
The
pressure for government employment and inadequate
revenues compel the payment of low salaries and
wages that in turn drive away many qualified workers
to the private sector. These adversely affect the
overall capacity, productivity and effectiveness
of government in providing public goods and services
and promoting national development.
3.
The growing dissatisfaction with our highly centralized
unitary system of government has finally exerted
pressure to decentralize administration to some
extent and devolve some powers and functions to
local governments. The unresolved national question
regarding the Moros (Muslim Filipinos) and the people
of the Cordilleras, that has forced them to rebel
and even want to secede, has engendered an accommodation
of their cultural or religious interests in the
form of regional autonomy, but old problems persist.
For
over 350 years Spain governed Filipinas as a highly
centralized colony in order to control its inhabitants.
Even then the Spanish colonial government had only
nominal control over parts of Muslim and lumad Mindanao
and the people in the Cordilleras. Sired by the
Filipino Revolution and born under threat of annexation
by the United States, the infant Philippine Republic
had to be unitary in structure for its survival.
For expediency, the United States continued the
highly centralized unitary system although greater
self-government was granted to the Filipino political
leaders and administrators.
Under
the 1935 Constitution, for the transition Commonwealth
and the ensuing Republic, the unitary structure
was institutionalized to further unify the young
nation amid national insecurity and fears of Japanese
imperialism in East Asia. The Filipino political
elites who governed the young nation-state were
inclined, in the manner of the Spanish and American
colonial governors, to continue with the centralized
control of the nation and archipelago. Local autonomy
was largely a slogan and it was granted only in
small, ineffective doses. Under the Marcos dictatorship
the national government tightened its grip on the
people and the local governments more than ever
before.
In
the 1987 Constitution the framers enshrined the
ideals and goals of participatory democracy, local
autonomy, and regional autonomy in Muslim Mindanao
and the Cordilleras. This was a strong reaction
to the Marcos authoritarian rule, and to the proverbial
inefficiency, red tape, ineffectiveness, unresponsiveness,
and unaccountability of our highly centralized government.
It was also a positive response to the assertion
of the people’s power in the EDSA Revolution
that brought down the dictatorship and ushered in
the restoration of democracy. The constitutional
mandate to establish an autonomous region for Muslim
Mindanao and for the Cordilleras recognized the
demands for autonomy partly to avert secession by
the Moro and Cordillera rebels.
The
enactment of the Local Autonomy Act of 1991 has
devolved certain powers and functions from the national
to the local governments and further enhanced the
participation of civil society organizations in
governance. With the resurgence of press and media
freedom as well, the consolidation of our newly
restored democracy has better prospects of success.
Admittedly, these developments in democratization
and decentralization have followed the achievement
of a measure of national unity that a long, centralized,
unitary structure had made possible.
The
interval of authoritarian rule underscored the paramount
importance of re-democratization, separation of
powers, and decentralizing and dispersing power
to lower levels of government and in the society.
The further dispersal of governmental powers in
a federation will create stronger centers of countervailing
power that will enhance the protection of liberty.
4.
Local leaders are demanding their release from the
costly, stifling, and demoralizing effects of excessive
centralization and controls by the national government.
The
centralization of governmental power and resources
in the national government has impelled local government
leaders to spend too much time, money and energy
in following up their papers and secure the release
of funds in the national offices in Metro Manila.
Local and national officials and even the faculty
of state universities need the approval of Malacanang
to travel abroad in connection with their work.
The procurement of vehicles and certain equipment
and of some contracts for services require approval
of the Office of the President or the Department
of Budget and Management.
This
administrative centralization and the President’s
tight control over the releases of funds already
authorized and of the local governments’ share
of the taxes they have collected has led local leaders
far from the capital to complain of “Imperial
Manila.” They feel that their localities are
treated like “colonies” of the national
government. It is this cumulative local resentment
that once fueled a movement for the Mindanao independence
movement. The excesses of centralization have also
motivated the movement for local autonomy which
is still being constrained by the momentum of entrenched
centralism.
Even
the limited decentralization and local autonomy
carried out under the 1987 Constitution and the
Local Government Code of 1991 have already produced
encouraging results in the form of innovations,
resourcefulness, and self-reliance on the part of
leaders in certain localities, as documented by
the Galing Pook awards program. Some examples cited
by Erlinda Burton are:
•
Health services: mobilizing puroks (local communities)
for primary health care in Balilihan, Bohol;
• Environmental management: saving the watershed
in Maasin, Iloilo;
• Public finance: increasing tax collection
in Binagonan, Rizal;
• Peace initiatives: energizing puroks and
reconciliation with Communist rebels in Sampaloc,
Quezon;
• Integrated development: sustaining integrated
development efforts in Guagua, Panpanga;
• Socio-cultural development: enriching local
culture in Bulacan;
• Employment generation: strengthening economic
enterprise in Penablanca, Cagayan Valley; and
• Productivity improvement: increasing productivity
in Naga City;
As
Alex B. Brillantes, Jr. describes the effects of
the Local Government Code of 1991:
A
quiet revolution is going on in the countryside
proving that devolution is working. Though not as
widely publicized, it may be asserted that due to
the increased powers and responsibilities of local
governments, innovations and creativeness at the
local level have been engendered by the Code. Not
only local governments are taking up the challenge
of devolution. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
and people’s organizations (POs) as well have
been encouraged by the code to be active participants
in the process of governance at the local level
(p.531).
5.
Greater freedom and home rule through the larger
regional states and their consolidated local government
units would create conditions that substantially
improve public services and benefits and accelerate
the economic growth and sustainable development
of these areas, and therefore of the country as
a whole.
The
consolidation of some 78 provinces, many of them
small ones, into just seven states made up of the
existing administrative regions, will make the states
more economic in size and resources, and therefore
more economically and politically productive and
viable. The present mini-provinces do not have adequate
resources as revenue base and spend too much of
their budget in staff salaries.
With
substantial power and authority to govern, including
the power to tax and to retain state and local revenues,
and a leaner bureaucracy, the states would be in
a better position to attract investments, promote
industrialization, modernize agriculture, develop
tourism, and protect and enhance the local environment.
The
existing centralized government structure and culture
which emphasizes regulation and control discourages
creativity, initiative, resourcefulness, and risk-taking.
Decentralization in a federal system will require
a rethinking and reengineering of government. Federalism
will challenge national leaders to do what can best
be done by the federal or national government. Likewise,
it will challenge state and local leaders to do
what should be done in the states and localities.
A federal structure will attract more leaders with
business and entrepreneurial skills to serve in
the state and local governments.
6.
A federal political system would better enable Filipinos
to sustain their national unity and identity, and
at the same time preserve and enhance their regional
and local cultures and languages. National unity
shall be built on the foundation of cultural diversity
and social and political pluralism.
Federalism
will foster inter-state competition in achieving
regional and local economic development that will
in turn support cultural vitality and diversity
in the states, even as the federal or national government
helps the whole country to attain equitable and
balanced national development and cultural progress.
The
use and development of Filipino, the national language
and lingua franca, is a welcome cultural development.
This has been advanced by Tagalog and Filipino movies
and the broadcast media, by the teaching of Filipino
in the schools, and by increasing internal travel
and migration. The development of the national culture
and language is reflected in the increasing production
of published materials in Filipino. At the same
time the nation benefits by the learning and use
of English as medium of communication, internally
and internationally.
However,
national cultural development is proceeding at the
expense of most other Filipino languages and cultures.
The latter have remained in the oral tradition and
are largely unwritten. Thus they are difficult to
develop and disseminate. The upshot is the cumulative
impoverishment of Filipino national culture as a
whole. The globalization of cultures that accompany
transnational and borderless trade, industry, news,
entertainment, and communication also endangers
the survival and nurture of our various indigenous
cultures. The ideal Philippines should reflect “national
unity in cultural diversity.”
As
already said, in a federal system decentralization
stimulates socio-economic development and progress.
The division of the whole country into a few regional
states having greater homogeneity of languages and
cultures and improving the livelihood of its people
will foster pride in one’s locality, ethnicity,
and regional and local cultures and environments.
At the same time the federal structure will spur
inter-state competition and national progress.
The
continuation of the presidential form of government--in
which all qualified citizens vote directly for the
President, Vice-President, and federal legislators--will
be a unifying force for the nation. The role of
the federal or national government will be to strengthen
national unity and identity, ensure national security,
and promote a balanced and sustainable national
development. .It will especially assist and support
the less developed areas and communities in cooperation
with their states and local governments.
7.
The internal threats of economic underdevelopment,
social injustice, Communist and Moro rebellion,
and the potential for greater civil discontent are
compounded by external threats in the form of globalization
and the growing economic and military power of some
neighboring countries in the Asian region. With
the advantages of federalism cited above, a federation
would be better able to meet the challenge of globalization
and to ensure national security.
Some
theorists of federalism cite the presence of threats
from perceived foreign enemies as a factor associated
with the origins of federations (Riker, Wheare,
Maddox, Dikshit). Moreover, there are serious internal
threats to Philippine national security. In this
context, as federalism strengthens the nation’s
capacity for effective governance, encourages national
unity and social cohesion, accelerates development,
and in the long run reduce internal stress as more
citizens participate in shaping their destinies,
the nation will be better able to cope with internal
and external threats to national security.
The
foregoing hypotheses touched on several conditions
that political theorists of federalism associate
with the beginnings of federalism. As cited by Jonathan
Lemco, two of those are:
•
The existence of some popular hope that conditions
for them would improve by changing from a unitary
system to a federal one (Wheare, Deutsch); and
•
The experience of a previous political association
among the people (Wheare, Watts).
8. There are still other conditions present in the
Philippines that political theorists associate with
the origins of federalism in various parts of the
world.
Again,
as cited by Lemco, these include:
•
the presence of a territorial or spatial division
of power between the national government and the
local government units (Elazer, Lijphart);
•
the presence of a written, flexible constitution
(Watts, Lijphart);
•
the presence of a bicameral form of government.
(Watts, Lijphart)in which the Senate can be made
to represent the states and the House of Representatives
the people in the localities and the country at
large;
•
geographical neighborhood among local governments
as constituent units (Wheare, Maddox) of the political
system;
•
the presence of flexible political elites during
the federating process (Deutsch¸ Lijphart),
although it remains to be seen if they are flexible
enough to favor and carry out the proposed, drastic
change to a federation.
•
the presence of a general community of outlook (Watts)
which also remains to be demonstrated; and
•
the existence of role models (Watts) of which Filipinos
can point to many, such as Malaysia and Switzerland
among the smaller countries, and India, Australia,
the Federal Republic of Germany, the United States,
and Canada among the larger ones.
V. SUMMING UP
The
proposed conversion of the present unitary system
of government to a federal system shall be undertaken
in two stages. The first stage will require the
amalgamation of the present 14 administrative regions,
plus the ARMM, into just ten large administrative
regions and the granting to them of more substantial
regional and local autonomy. This new “regionalization”
will continue until 2009-2010.
In
2008-2009 constitutional amendments or revision
to institute a federal system and the other reforms
will be drafted and completed. These shall be ratified
in a plebiscite to be held also in 2009. The amended
or revised constitution will govern the federal,
state and local elections to be held in 2010. This
is the second stage of the conversion to a federal
system.
To
summarize the theory of federalization underlying
the proposal to transform the Filipino political
system from its present unitary structure to a federation,
let me restate my hypotheses as follows:
1.
The Philippines has achieved sufficient national
unity and democratization, including a measure of
decentralization and local autonomy, as the basis
for establishing a federal system of government.
The latter will follow a decade’s transition
of “regionalization” and increased local
autonomy involving both the national government
and the local governments.
2.
Specifically, it has been the growing difficulties
and frustration with the country’s highly
centralized unitary system that culminated in the
1987 Constitution’s design for the development
of participatory democracy, local autonomy, and
an active role for civil society in governance.
(The latter was partly a reaction to the extreme
centralization during the authoritarian regime that
began in September, 1972 and –ended at the
EDSA revolution in February,1986).
3.
Federalism will respond to the demands of local
leaders for their release from the costly, time-consuming,
stifling, and demoralizing effects of excessive
centralization and controls by the national government
in the unitary system. The structures and processes
of the federation will challenge and energize the
people and their state and local governments. Such
further democratization will encourage creativity,
initiative, and innovation, spur inter-state competition,
and foster state and local self-reliance.
4.
By removing the centralized structures that impose
local dependence and stifle local initiative and
resourcefulness, and thus providing greater freedom
and home rule, a federal system will greatly increase
the capacity of the people and the government to
deal with the country’s chronic problems of
poverty, injustice, and inadequate social services
and infrastructure—the manifestations of under-development.
5.
In a federal structure substantial and equitable
development for the whole country is more likely
to be achieved, and the people’s liberty will
be protected by the further dispersion of power
in the government and the society. Metro Manila,
the national capital, will have the status of a
state and will be able to deal more effectively
with its problems as a metropolis.
6.
A federal system will be better able to achieve
and sustain national unity and identity, and at
the same time protect and enhance the nation’s
cultural diversity and social pluralism.
7.
By strengthening the nation-state’s capacity
to deal with its critical internal problems and
to develop, a federal system will also be better
able to respond to the external threats to national
security and the challenges of globalization.
There
are more conditions cited that would tend to favor
the conversion of the unitary Filipino political
system to a federal system. In this regard, it is
in order to recall the conclusions drawn by two
other Filipino advocates of federalism in the 1980s.
Referring
to K.C.Wheare’s theory in his book, Federal
Government, Rizal G. Buendia reached this conclusion
which I quote with only minor editing:
As
far as the pre-conditions for federalism are concerned,
the Philippines has relatively satisfied these,
to wit:
(1)
a previous existence of the federating state as
a former distinct colony and a nation-state with
a distinct government of its own;
(2) a divergence of economic interests with the
federating unitary state leading to the desire of
the component local governments to remain autonomous
for certain economic, political and cultural purposes;
(3) geographical obstacles to effective unitary
government, i.e. large areas separated by bodies
of water, mountains or other physical obstacles,
poor communications, etc.;
(4) differences of culture, religion, language or
nationality;
(5) dissimilarity of social institutions; and
(6) existence of different laws, norms, practices,
and ways of life.
Citing
Gabriel U. Iglesias’ paper, “The Advantages
of a Federal Form of Government,” Buendia
adds:
Iglesias
aptly describes the advantages of a federal structure
for the country which are as follows:
(1)
it accords equal status and treatment to…the
needs of all parts of the country regardless of
their ethnic, religious, linguistic or geographical
condition;
(2) it leads to less pressure for separation from
the nation-state as peculiar needs of various cultural
groups are defined in accordance with their own
customary and religious practices, and enhances
the development of their resources based on their
identified priorities;
(3) it serves as an equalizing factor as it promotes
a more balanced socio-eonomic and political development
attuned to the needs of the region, enabling greater
participation of the people …in the decision-making
process;
(4) it brings the government closer to the people
and makes it sensitive to their problems and needs;
and
(5) it enhances national integration and unity.
Finally,
Buendia sharply contrasts federalism with centralism
thus:
As
federalism promotes democracy, centralism forces
undue obedience. As federalism enhances Filipino
nationhood, centralism forces unity and homogenization.
As federalism expresses confidence in the ideals
of liberty and freedom, centralism remains “the
refuge of fear.”
The
federal system of government for the Philippines
offers a resolution towards the national question.
xxx It secures not only the sovereignty of the Republic
but the future of the people’s lives.
I
would not go as far and overstate the case for federalism.
However, to me federalism offers a higher probability
than our unitary system of enabling the people and
the nation-state to realize the advantages and benefits
that I have stated in my theory and proposal.
I
have also indicated other structural changes that
should go with the shift to a federal system, to
strengthen and sustain the sense of unity and nationhood..
One is the continuation of the presidential form
of government and direct election by the people
of the President and Vice-President, but by “block
voting.” Second is the synchronization of
all elections every four years, for economy and
for promoting the development of nation-wide, political
parties. Third is that the President may be reelected
only to a second term, or for a total of not more
than eight consecutive years, so the President can
be more easily made accountable for his leadership.
Fourth is the establishment of an integrated metropolitan
government in Metro Manila, the national capital
state, that may also serve as a model for Metro
Cebu and Metro Davao.
When
established the federation will not be a fixed structure
but a flexible one. It will necessarily undergo
continual change and adjustment in the degree of
centralization and decentralization. It will offer
continuing challenges to federal, state and local
leaders to effect the needed changes in policies
and structures, the better to solve their unique
as well as common problems, with the people’s
increasing participation. In some ways it will be
more difficult to make a federation work well. It
will require not only “a federal spirit”
of cooperation and compromise but also a lot of
political will at all levels (Gagnon: 35). But whether
the political system is unitary or federal, these
are crucial ingredients of democratic governance.
By
no means would federalism be a panacea to our many
and complex problems as a nation. In his study,
Political Stability in Federal Governments, Lemco
concludes: “Federalism is simply not the great
panacea that so many have claimed it to be”
(:166).
VI. CONTINUING STUDY AND PUBLIC DEBATE IN AID OF
CONGRESSIONAL REFORMS AND CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE
I
intend to pursue my reform ideas by subjecting them
to serious criticism and improvement. This can be
done under the auspices of the Philippine Political
Science Association, and specifically through its
multi-disciplinary Committee for Constitutional
Continuity and Change--which I chair.
Under
the Constitution, it is Congress that initiates
and proposes amendments and revision of the Constitution.
I would like therefore to propose to the leaders
of the Senate and the House of Representatives that
they include in their agenda for constitutional
change a study of the possible federalization of
the Republic of the Philippines.
I
would also request the leaders of the Union of Local
Authorities, the League of Provinces, the League
of Cities, and the League of Municipalities to consider
proposals for federalization as part of their agenda
for reforms.
The
Center for Leadership, Citizenship and Democracy
at the U.P. National College of Public Administration
and Governance can work together with the PPSA’s
Committee on Constitutional Continuity and Change
and the U.P.Law Center in pursuing the study of
federalization and other possible constitutional
changes.
REFERENCES
Books
Brown-John,
C. Llyod. ed. Centralizing and Decentralizing Trends
in Federal States. Lanham, Maryland:
University Press of America, 1988.
Dikshit, Ramesh Dutta. The Political Geography of
Federalism. New Delhi: Macmillan
Co., 1975.
Deutsch, Karl. Tides Among Nations. New York: Free
Press, 1979.
Elazer, Daniel J. ed. Federalism and Political Integration.
Jerusalem: Turtledove
Publishing Co., 1979.
Lemco, Jonathan. Political Stability in Federal
Governments. New York: .Praeger,
1991.
Lijphart, Arend. Democracy in Plural Societies:
A Comparative Exploration. New :
Haven: Yale University Press, 1977.
Norton, Alan. International Handbook of Local and
Regional Government: A Comparative Analysis of Advanced
Democracies. England: Edward Elgar Ltd.,
1994.
Pensar, Ted. Manila Colonialism: The Dark Side of
the Flag. Quezon City: Luna P. Dacudao, 1988.
Peterson, Paul E. The Price of Federalism. Washington,
D.C.:The Brookings Institution,
1995.
Tapales, Proserpina Domingo; Cuaresma, Jocelyn C.;
Cabo, Wilhelmina L. eds. Local
Government in the Philippines: A Book of Readings.
2 vols. Diliman, Quezon
City: Center for Local and Regional Governance and
National College of Public Administration and Governance,
1998.
Riker, William. Federalism: Origin, Operation, Significance.
Boston: Little Brown and
Co., 1964.
Watts, Ronald L. Administration in Federal Systems.
London: Hutchinson, 1970.
Wheare, K.C. Federal Government. 4th ed. London:
Oxford University Press, 1964.
Articles and Papers
Agra,
Alberto C. “Current Issues and Emerging Trends
in Local Autonomy.” paper for the
Philippine Government Forum, Ateneo Center for Social
Policy and Ateneo School of
Government, January 2000.
Brillantes, Alex B. Jr. “Five-Year Assessment
of the Implementation of Devolution in the Local
Government Code of 1991,” in Local Government
in the Philippines: A Book of
Readings. Tapales, P.D.; Cuaresma, Jocelyn C.; Cabo,
Wilhelmina L. eds. 1998.
Buendia, Rizal G. “The Prospects of Federalism
in the Philippines: A Challenge to Political
Decentralization of the Unitary State,” Philippine
Journal of Public Administration, Vol.
XXXIII(April, 1989)No. 2.
Gagnon, Alain. “Federalism in Multi-Community
Countries: A Theoretical and Comparative Framework
of
Analysis,” in C. Lloyd Brown-John, ed.
Burton, Erlinda. “Baseline Study of Davao
del Norte, “unpublished paper, 2000. 8 pp.
Iglesias, Gabriel U. “The Advantages of a
Federal Form of Government.” Undated., cited
in the
article of Rizal G. Buendia.
“Towards a Decentralization Strategy Through
Regional Governments,” Symposium on the Concept
of Decentralization in Government, 24 May 1986.
Maddox, William P. “The Political Basis of
Federation.” American Political Science Review
35 .
(1941): 1120-21.
Ocampo, Romeo B. “Toward a More Authentic
Local Autonomy: Premises and Proposals for
Reform,” Philippine Social Science Council
Symposium on social Issues, 17 April 1986.
“Decentralization and Local Autonomy: A Framework
for Assessing Progress,” in Strengthening
Local Government Administration and Accelerating
Local Development,”
Perfecto L. Padilla, ed. Diliman, Quezon City: College
of Public Administration, U.P., 1992, pp. 143-187.
Padilla, Perfecto L. “Central-Local Government
Partnership in Development,” Local Government
Bulletin, Dec. 1977-Jan. 1978.
Reports
Araneta,
Salvador. The Bayanikasan Constitution for the Federal
Republic of the Philippines,” Bayanikasan
Research Foundation, Malabon, Metro Manila, 1981,
115 pp.
National Economic Development Authority. The Philippine
National Development Plan:
Directions for the 21st Century. 1999.
National Economic Development Authority. ANGAT PINOY
2004: Medium Term Philippine
Development Plan, 1999-2004. (1999).
United Nations Development Programme. (UNDP). Reconceptualizing
Governance.
Management Development and Governance Division.
Bureau for Policy and Programme Support (January,
1997).
United Nations Technical Assistance Programme (UNTAP).
Decentralization for
National and Local Government. New York: United
Nations, 1962
Constitution, Laws, Legislative Bills
Constitution
of the Philippines, 1987
Local Government Code of 1991
House Bill No. 7845. Second Regular Session, Eleventh
Congress, introduced by Rep. Romeo
DC Candazo, Marikina City.
Notes and Speeches
Diaz-Manalo,
Pamela. “On Local Autonomy and Selective Autonomous
Regions.” E-mail to J.V.
Abueva, 5 January 2000.
Ponce Enrile, Juan. “Federalism: The Answer
to Manila’s Imperialism,” speech before
the
Rotary Clubs of Pasay, Paranaque, and Las Pinas,
27 April 1988.
Vicerra, Rodolfo V. “Local Government Reform,”
E-mail note to J.V. Abueva, 6 January 2000. |