Some may say it’s destiny but others counter it as a dynasty. Political
Dynasties in the Philippines have been an issue now especially before every
elections. The 1987 constitution of the Philippines states in Article II
Section 26, "The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for
public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by
law." Many have called to the Congress to pass an Anti-Dynasty Law, but
this bill has been passed over since 1987. It has been a long time and now,
many react on the issue of dynasties in the country.
Few notable families have been controlling the Politics in the
Philippines. It is normal for a politician's son, wife, brother, or other
kinsman, to run for the same or other office in the government. Just before Halalan
2013, about 250 families dominating the Philippine Politics both in the
national and local level, 56 percent of them come from old political elites and
44 percent emerged after EdsaR in 1986. Fifteen out of the 23 current senators
in the 15th Congress have relatives serving in elective position; eleven of
them have relatives that are representative. As a whole, 94 percent of the
provinces in the Philippines have political dynasties. (Sibulan, 2013)
Although political dynasties are not illegal and the people have their
own right to vote, the Anti Political Dynasty Bill should be enacted because
political clans are equated with corruption and are not fair in the way that
their name can easily capture the minds of the voters.
Though the very mention of political dynasties is enough to spark
controversy and criticism it can be inferred that the reason why political
dynasties are so widespread in the country right now is its ability to
implement or bring forth new policies for the benefit of the masses with ease.
The presence of political dynasty isn’t that much opposition to proposed
policies especially in local governments. Let us say, a family holding different
positions in the local government agree in a single beneficial policy or
program, it would serve the peoples best interests since there is no time
wasted in arguing over a single matter. Progress is maximized in this manner.
Another point to consider is that political dynasties reflect the voters’
preference. The fact that political dynasties lasts for more than one
generation only strengthens the reality that political dynasties, amidst all
the criticisms, manage to serve the best interests and well being of the
people. All the people who were in Edsa 1 know that the Aquinos are great
examples of politicians that serve best for the nation. They brought democracy
to the people and that is what the people wanted.
People are powerful. They elected these officials. And that choice is backed up with the belief that this politician could bring reform and progress. People could elect someone else, someone who is not a part of the family but the fact that they did not, though they had the capacity to do so suggest that like the current governance they are willing to elect this official in office and give him or her another term for they believe that he/she has the capacity to do what is best. If people believe that members of certain family can bring forth the life that they deserve, let them. It’s not a political dynasty; it is an exercise of democratic citizenship in those circumstances.
On the grounds of justification, we still cannot accept the presence and tolerance of political dynasties. The constitutional policy stated in Article II-section 26 expresses a national commitment to democratize election and appointment to positions in the government and eliminate the principal obstacle to “equal access to opportunities to public service” and that is political dynasties. The dominance of political families in the past and after Edsa 1 and 2 not only kept more deserving but poor individuals from running or even winning in elections. It also enabled powerful and affluent politicians to corner appointive positions for their relatives and followers as if they are gifted with the ability to serve the country. (Mendoza, 2011)
The constitution sees the presence of political
dynasties as a hindrance for national interests and in conflict with its
policies to maintain equality and a just and dynamic social order. It seeks to
prohibit political dynasties if not eradicate it for they deem it as a breeding
ground of everything this country, this constitution was founded upon. However,
the state is expressly mandated to prohibit political dynasties. Congress has
no discretion on the matter except merely to spell out the meaning and scope of
the term political dynasties. So perhaps it is time to take a step against
political dynasties. Another more archaic name for political dynasties is
“political warlordism” The prohibition helps eliminate this event which has
been the source of abuse and, therefore lawlessness, and give young and
enlightened leaders, who have no political machinery or vested interests to
speak or a chance to be elected.
In the 1987 constitution, there are many instances where our constitutional policy prevents the presence and the growth of political dynasties both in the local and national governments from the executive branch to the legislative. It is seen Article II section 26, Article 6 sections 4 and 5 and even in Article 10 that political dynasties or wardlordism made it impossible for qualified and deserving individuals to enter any public offices. Prohibition in political dynasties levels the playing field for public officials in the political arena. The constitution is considered to be the “law of the land” or the supreme law governing all, it has led our country to great times and steered our nation away from great evils as well. Now with flourishing of political dynasties, we turn to the constitution for aid and found that our constitution is against political dynasties in all its aspects. It has showed us the way, now it is our turn to take the next step against political dynasties.
References:
Rocamora, J
(1998), “Corruption in the Philippines. A Beginner's Guide (Introduction)” in
Coronel, S (ed) Pork and Other Perks: Corruption and Governance in the
Philippines, Pasig: Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism.
Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson (2013), “The Origins Of
Power, Prosperity and Poverty: Why Nations Fail?” (book) Political Dynasties in the Philippines Site by ATLANTIC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_dynasties_in_the_Philippines
Prof.
Roland Sibulan, Center for People Empowerment in Governance, UP Diliman for
Pandayo sa UP sa Halalan 2013.
http://halalan.up.edu.ph
nice
ReplyDelete