On the issue of Federalism as a system of government for our country

By Bagong Katipunero
10/16/08

Recently federalism has been an issue because of the Bangsamoro Juridical Entity that was crafted by the GRP-MILF peace panel. The BJE included the very controversial MOA-AD that defined the territorial boundaries and political powers therein of the Bangsamoro authority which in effect is creating a state within the state. As a parallel effort, Senator Nene Pimentel has submitted to the Philippine Senate a joint resolution to convene the Congress into a constituent assembly for the purpose of revising the constitution that will create eleven (11) States out of the Republic and establish a federal system of government. Likewise in the House of Representatives, Speaker Nograles is also pushing for constitutional amendments through con-ass. Malacanang is very happy to support this development because a change in our form of government from central-bicameral republic to federal-parliamentary system would translate to term extension for GMA. Under these circumstances I am sharing my thoughts on Federalism...

Before I give my position on federalism I would like to state my personal circumstance. In my years of service in the Armed Forces I had been assigned at various places in the country. I am an extension of the central government's policies and authority to the remote areas of our country. I am supposed to work as an ambassador that will bring the government closer to the people. I am an element of development. But to my frustration there is no development to bring, no peace and security to give, no goodwill to provide. I have seen poverty and backwardness in our provinces and rural municipalities first hand. I saw and felt the tragedy of war imposed upon our countrymen caught in the crossfire of principles between Filipinos. I had interacted with unscrupulous government officials both local and national. I experienced how government bureaucracy has impeded the delivery of basic public service to our rural municipalities. It is difficult to comprehend how progress in Manila has not trickled down to our provinces. To my mind this system should change. The central government has neglected the rural areas. Development had been too center-oriented. Everything revolves in Imperial Manila. Federalism will be the key to an independent and truly free people. Federalism will give the people of Mindanao, Visayas, and Luzon the power to chart their development and cut the cycle of dependence from the central government. Given this view and frame I am for Federalism. This was my position years ago.

But now that I have seen the political realities and have been exposed to the national situation I can say that a change to a Federal form of government today will not be healthy for the following reasons:

On the problem of Philippine politics:

After a careful analysis the backwardness and underdevelopment of our countryside could not be blamed on the system or form of our government alone but in large part could be blamed to the Philippine style politics that has shackled our country into poverty. The local leaders themselves have exploited the weakness and ignorance of the people in the countryside in order to keep them in power. For so many years the elite families in every province has dominated the local politics in the countryside. Those who own the lands or controls a monopoly of the local economy gets elected this is due to a corrupt and inept electoral system. Political dynasties are prevalent and openly practiced in many provinces of our country. My question is, what did they do to improve the situation of their locality? Nothing, because 90% of these leaders are all driven by personal and family interest than public service. They do not adhere to any party ideals. They are mini-monarchs in their locality.

My Public Administration Principle was plain and simple governance based on public service. I believed that the government exists because of the people. Under the Social Contract Theory, power and authority emanates from the people. Without the people there is no government, without the government there is no public administration. But in my field experience the situation was different. Public officials and the people in authority appear to be living on Divine Right Theory. They act as if people should bow and serve them and that the government exists to serve their personal interests. Their motto; “What is good for me is good for my locality.”

Thus if we shift to a Federal Form of government there is a threat that we will just be creating an elite rule who will lord it over the country’s subdivided territorial domain. There is a risk that we will be splitting up the country into some form of “monarchial estates” and defeat the true meaning of democracy which our fore fathers fought for.

On the Organizational problem:

One of the major problems that a federal set up would bring is Organization and Management. Each Federal State will establish a bureaucracy similar to the Federal Government knowing the dynamics of our local politics the federal state bureaucracy will just be as inept and corrupt as that of the national. Local politics is patronage politics and politics of spoils so you expect that the new federal state resources will be squandered by the party in power. Case in point was the ARMM which created an inept corrupt bureaucratic system overnight. Likewise I believe there will be a problem in the relocation of qualified national level personnel to the designated federal state and a shortage of qualified personnel to man the bureaucracy just as it was experienced in the implementation of RA 7160. If that is the case we will be starting with the wrong foot which is why we are in this mess in the first place because our early leaders have planted the seed of corruption and inefficiency since day one of the Republic.

On the problem of Geography:

I believe that as an archipelagic country we would have difficulty in mapping out an acceptable federal state territorial subdivision. The problem lies with the small island provinces which are too small as a state. If you attach it with other islands to compose a state it then again defeats the purpose of a federal state which is to provide accessible public service. Topography will also restrict trade and economic activity within the defined federal regions. Likewise there is a tendency for a strong federal state to secede and declare their independence because geography provides natural defined territorial borders such as SULBAT (Sulu, Basilan, Tawi-Tawi). This problem occurred in the disintegration of the former state of Yugoslavia which resulted in Balkanization.

On the problem of Economics:

There is a problem with the equitable distribution of natural resources and wealth in our country. A lot of defined federal states are at a disadvantage over economic growth and development compared to the few developed and wealthy states. They cannot compete economically with the rich states which would result to economic imbalance that will pull down the poorer states further down the line. The problem with that is you cannot always bail out an ailing State from economic deficit or else you defeat the purpose of federalism. In the recent senate resolution of Sen. Pimentel he suggested a budget of 100 billion pesos for the 11 federal states in order to jumpstart their economic growth but the question begins with, where will you get the budget? Next is, will the federal states have the right economic managers to push for the right economic reforms? Lastly, how sure are we that it will not be part of the spoils of the new state leadership and just drain out through corruption? Case in point again is the ARMM. Thus federalism would be an expensive experiment.

On the problem of Culture:

The first problem with regard to culture is our ethnocentric nature. We take care of our ethnic affiliation first above others. The problem is that there is no major ethnic group that could make up a single state thus a federal state will be composed of several ethnic affiliations wherein a dominant province or ethnology with in the state would emerge while the others would be treated as minorities. The dominant ethnic affiliation would alienate the minority. Case in point again was ARMM wherein when the Tausugs ruled ARMM all the projects for development was allocated to Sulu. Maguidanao and Lanao were forgotten. The ARMM is composed of three major ethnic tribes Tausug, Maranaw, and Maguindanaoan. The other ethnic group such as Yakan and Samal became a minority and has no say in the ARMM structure.

The second problem of culture is the culture of corruption. I believe that the new federal states will inherit the culture of corruption from the old local government set up. As the saying goes “you can not teach old dogs new tricks.” If corruption prevails, no amount of good planning and scientific design for a successful federal state model would succeed.

Recommendation:

I would like to recommend that we study first our position before supporting a drastic shift into a federal form of government. Let us not romanticize the notion of independent progressive federal states that the developed countries have. We should first ask ourselves who are these people that is pushing for federalism and parliamentary form of government. What’s in it for them? We should guard ourselves from these vultures who want to carve out our country and divide it among themselves. It already happened during the commonwealth period wherein the motivation of the elite Philippine Assembly to call for independence was not born out of patriotism but because of the prospect of spoils and the potential of running the country for themselves. Thus when the Americans left a new set of masters took over.

Before Federalism I think it would be best if we could reform first our government under the existing system. We can strengthen the Local Government Code, curb out corruption, reform the COMELEC and computerize the elections, improve our economic and fiscal standing, resolve our peace and order situation, educate our people, and strengthen our institutions. Only then we can entertain the concept of transforming to a Parliamentary-Federal form of government. I believe the problem does not lie on the system but with the people who run it…