I.
DISCUSS FIVE (5) ARGUMENTS YOU AGREE WITH AND FIVE (5) ARGUMENTS YOU
DISAGREE WITH. EXPLAIN EACH CHOSEN ARGUMENT IN 2-3 SENTENCES.
AGREE
1. The decision to transform institutions rarely occurs in a vacuum, it is guided by a
country’s historical experience, political culture and the goals agreed upon by key
stakeholders in the reform process.
EXPLANATION: The apparent reason why most Filipinos reject the idea of
Constitutional reform, as well as pursuance of the parliamentary system, is through
our shared political beliefs nor experiences, which influences how we perceive the
political arena in our country. For example, according to Professor Dante
Gatmaytan of the University of the Philippines College of Law, our skepticism
towards Charter Change is rooted in the Marcos' era, where the dictator used
constitutional change to duck term limits. Conclusively, this means that public
attitudes certainly matter for policy choice and that policymakers are obliged to
be receptive to public opinion when making decisions (Burstein, 2003; Stimson,
MacKuen, & Erikson, 1995).
2. Patronage-ridden and personality-oriented parties characterize the country’s
politics (Lande’:1965). Thus, they are unable to aggregate demands of the
electorate and fail to serve as a mechanism to educate the public on vital
development issues. This then leads to a political system dominated by the elite.
EXPLANATION: Political practices such as political dynasties and patronage are
consequences as well as an outturn of debilitating democracy. Filipino
personalistic culture creates a constituency and a government that sees political
relationships as personal relationships—what is expected of a politician nor a
public official is what's anticipated of a personal friend or acquaintance. What
makes a candidate or a politician popular to the people is a highly personal
approach to campaigning and governance; our political system creates
restlessness in society because it appears like the majority tries to suppress the
minority.
3. Little has changed in the political power base which in turn reinforces assessments
that indeed the country can be described as a ‘weak state’ that is vulnerable to
predatory interests (Hutchcroft 1998; McCoy 1994).
EXPLANATION: Due to eminent presence of patronage, political dynasties, nor
nepotism in our political system—the minority feels alienated from engaging in
Philippine political arena. Proof of this are reports of the Philippine Center for
Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) that show that electoral politics in the country is still
a millionaire’s club, dominated by families with links to vital business interests (2004).
4. Designing an electoral system should also consider a country’s political culture
and the socio-economic context of politics (Heywood 2002:237).
EXPLANATION: Political culture has been shown to have significant consequences
for the prospects of gaining public support for other policy instruments (cf. Cherry,
García, Kallbekken, & Torvanger, 2014; Cherry, Kallbekken, & Kroll, 2017).
Consequently, the choice of Electoral System is one of the most important
institutional decisions for any democracy; legislators should consider each
individuals-level factor on policy support. A selection of a particular electoral
system has a profound effect on the future political life of the country concerned,
and electoral systems, once chosen, often remain fairly constant as political
interests solidify around and respond to the incentives presented by them.
5. While consistent high voter turnout is one of the hallmarks of Philippine democracy,
surveys show that Filipinos have expressed decreasing trust in the electoral system.
EXPLANATION: Philippine electoral system has no clear distinction between a
political party nor a partylist, party ideologies are not present as well. Moreover,
electoral corruption, pervasiveness of political dynasties in the country undermines
the system. Accordingly, Philippine elections are often marred by violence, fraud
and irregularities.
DISAGREE
1. Parliamentary systems are said to be less corrupt according to a recent cross-
country study (Lederman et al. 2005).
EXPLANATION: More often than not, parliaments turn out to be part of the problem
rather the solution. Transparency International’s Global Corruption Barometer
regularly shows that citizens rank ‘elected officials’ as among the most corrupt of
their institutions. Corruption is pervasive, a fusion of both legislative and executive
and a dominance of a strong political party, as well as the absence of term limits
in a parliamentary system isn’t an assurance for it to be claimed as “less corrupt.”
2. A parliamentary system is more flexible because electoral terms are not rigid and
a vote of no confidence can depose the prime minister. It allows a more
predictable and efficient leadership change and ensures stable governance.
EXPLANATION: The executive is organized very differently in a parliamentary
system. It requires too much amendment on constitution, and the distinction
between the arms of the government isn’t emphasized.
3. Philippine presidents hardly represented a big majority of the electorate.
Consequently, this situation weakens the election’s viability as a mechanism for
democratic representation.
EXPLANATION: In a presidential system, the president is usually chosen directly by
the electorate, or by a set of electors directly chosen by the people, separate
from the legislature. Hence, I don’t think the claim that Philippine president hardly
represents a big majority because in the first place, it was in concurrence of the
citizens with brief deliberation to come up with their chosen representative in the
executive department.
4. The fusion of the legislative and executive branches makes party dynamics very
important in terms of legislative-executive relations in parliamentary systems.
EXPLANATION: This explicitly violates the separation of powers, the disadvantage
of this so-called fusion of powers, inconsistently, is the power it gives to the
executive, not the legislative, arm of government; majority is made up of one
dominant party. Thus, protecting the executive from being truly accountable and
at the same time passing any laws expedient for the government.
5. The absence of a fixed term of office and the perennial threat of government
shake-up make a professional, competent and effective bureaucracy crucial in a
parliamentary system.
EXPLANATION: Knowing that the mindset of our officials is a person-first process, it
is a process which encourages everyone to put their needs before others;
Although parliamentarianism has been praised for allowing an election to take
place at any time, the lack of a definite election calendar can be abused. Term
limits is essential for restricting the service of lawmakers prevents politicians from
amassing too much power; As new people run for the position, it grows a lot easier
to yield ideas and even tap into their talents, heightening productivity. With the
same faces in Congress for a prolonged period, it will be relatively troublesome to
develop policies that align with the contemporary world.
II. IN 8-10 SENTENCES, DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT YOU AGREE ON THE PROPOSAL
TO AMEND THE 1987 CONSTITUTION.
The 1987 Constitution provides three modes of constitutional amendment:
1) by Congress as a constituent assembly; 2) by a constitutional convention;
and, 3) by people’s initiative. Amendments refer to changes that do not affect
the overall structure and basic principles of the Constitution; Revisions are
changes that involve alterations in the overall structure. The 1987 Philippine
Constitution restored the democracy undermined by decades of Martial Law
under then-dictator Ferdinand Marcos. Despite this, Philippine Democratic
stabilization is still improbable because the preponderance of our elected
officials has the same motive when it comes to preserving themselves in their
positions of power. Social isolation has become a central fact of life in our
society where political discourse has remained in the hands of a cultured class
that identifies the masses as outsiders. Democracy in the Philippines has always
been insubstantial–disconcerted by controversial elections, stimulated by the
parliament of the streets, spun by a justice system that favors only the powerful
few—it is no longer a system of checks and balances that deters exploitation
and protects the minority. Admittedly, our leaders have transformed it into a
rubber stamp to validate their reign. Still, this doesn’t change the fact that our
constitution’s worth revisiting, from the extent of judicial review, the limitation
on political dynasties, and eligibilities nor term limits of politicians.
I agree on certain amendments of the said 1987 constitution, preferably
through Con-Con. However, what I’m not in favor of is the revisions on the
entirety of it and the shift away to a parliamentary system—it is possible but I
don’t think it’s timely relevant now. As Christian Monsod – who was part of the
48-member 1986 Constitutional Commission implied at a Senate hearing on
Charter Change; problems lie in the implementation of the law, rather than the
Constitution itself.
III. REFERENCES
Gavilan, J. (2018, January 16). What you need to know about Charter Change.
Retrieved October 27, 2020, from https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/charter-
change-explainer-philippine-constitution
Tomacruz, S. (2018, February 02). Is there a need to change the 1987 Philippine
Constitution? Retrieved October 27, 2020, from
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/in-depth/need-1987-philippines-constitution-
charter-change
Harring, N., Jagers, S. C., & Matti, S. (2018). The significance of political culture,
economic context and instrument type for climate policy support: A cross-national
study. Climate Policy, 19(5), 636-650. doi:10.1080/14693062.2018.1547181
Are parliaments doing enough on corruption? (2020, January 21). Retrieved October
27, 2020, from https://www.wfd.org/2020/01/21/are-parliaments-doing-enough-on-
corruption/
13 Intense Pros and Cons of Congressional Term Limits 2020: Ablison Energy. (2020,
October 09). Retrieved October 27, 2020, from https://www.ablison.com/key-pros-
and-cons-of-congressional-term-limits/
Yusingco, M. (2019, January 30). COMMENTARY: Why Filipinos resist Charter Change.
Retrieved October 27, 2020, from
https://www.mindanews.com/mindaviews/2019/01/commentary-why-filipinos-resist-
charter-change/
Parliamentary systems. (n.d.). Retrieved October 27, 2020, from
https://www.britannica.com/topic/constitutional-law/Parliamentary-systems
