Home > Op-ed | To bottom

Form of government

Beleaguered Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo together with her allies particularly ex-president Fidel V. Ramos, Speaker of the House Jose de Venecia and former president of the University of the Philippines Dr. Jose Abueva have been harping on the need to change the political system from a presidential to parliamentary form of government to supposedly ensure political stability and to prevent future crisis.

At first, this proposal seems logical and feasible since in a parliamentary form of government, the prime minister, as head, is elected by parliament. In any event that he or she loses the confidence of the people, it is relatively easy for the law-making body to elect a new chief executive and regain the people’s trust. It may negate the need for People Power or as some will say ‘mob rule’.

Taking a closer look, however, the proposed shift from a presidential to a parliamentary-federal form of government is nothing but a facelift, a superficial change in the political system. This is because the elite, the landlords, the big business, the trapos (traditional politicians), will continue to dominate the political arena and will not lead to substantial change in government policies. It will still be detrimental to the millions of Filipino people.

Concretely, a system of government in whatever form, as long as this is elite-dominated, breeds policies that are a bane to the majority of the Filipino people. On the other hand its anti-worker policies are biased for big business and foreign corporations that reap humongous profits and enjoy tax holidays and incentives.
Again, these are just the by products of a political system dominated by the elite.

Thus changing the form of government is immaterial if the landlords and compradors continue to control the political system – same dog, different collar – as it will also bring economic and political instability.

As with the matter of Charter Change, the present composition of Congress and the Senate, were they to be transformed into a constituent assembly or constitutional convention now, cannot be trusted to form a new government or craft a new constitution that will effect basic socio-economic reforms, simply because they have clearly showed their bias against the toiling masses. Just look at the bills aimed at uplifting the economic condition of workers like the P125 wage increase filed by Bayan Muna which remains in the cellar. On the other hand, bills like the Expanded Value Added Tax (EVAT) which is clearly a repressive tax scheme that will directly affect the millions of Filipinos have been hastily passed into law. Or think of both houses’ handling of the Jueteng exposé and the Gloriagate scandal. Clearly, we saw the tendency of the dominant party, the pro-GMA legislators, to suppress the truth. It is just illogical to put in their hands the formation of a new government.

The same goes with the election of delegates to the Constitutional Convention were we to have one today simply because the integrity of the Commission on Elections is highly questionable. In addition, the formation of a Constitutional Commission is unacceptable since its members will be appointed by GMA which is unconstitutional. This is plain political suicide.

To ensure meaningful change in the political system, the toiling masses (peasants, workers, urban poor, fisherfolk, indigenous peoples, and women) should be given sufficient representation in the body that is tasked to form the new government. This is the only way that anti-people policies could be corrected.

Given the circumstances surrounding GMA and Congress, the closest body that will ensure fundamental change is a Peoples’ Democratic Transition Council proposed by progressive partylists namely Bayan Muna, Anakpawis and Gabriela Women’s Party. The transition council will be a coalition government composed of representatives of sectors, and personalities or representatives of major groups who played a major role in establishing the council.

Its agenda will prioritize the formation of a new government that will truly represent the interest of the workers, peasants, urban poor, professionals, women, youth, indigenous peoples, and the nationalist businessmen, thereby ensuring electoral, political and socio-economic reforms.

If we so desire a system change, is it not time we look beyond personalities or traditional systems of government to replace this present irrelevant one? #

Home > Op-ed | Back to top