PODCAST

“Requirements in Filing a Certificate of Candidacy & Political Literacy”

PSCC 106
Introduction to Political Theory

Bachelor of Arts in Political Science

3A

Submitted by:
ARA, Michael Andrei
GARCIA, Nadine
NAPILI, Maria Sandara
SORIANO, Eushi-Ann F.
TORIBIO, Valeria A.

Submitted to:
Mr. Jefferson Ballesteros

November 22, 2024

Introduction

At the heart of every democracy lies a profound question: "Does every citizen truly have an equal
opportunity to shape the decisions that affect their lives?"

Political participation is often regarded as the lifeblood of a democratic society. It is typically

thought of in terms of voting or running for public office. When individuals participate in these ways,
they assert their sovereignty, influencing the policies that shape their lives. Beyond being mere activities,
forms of political participation embody the very essence of democracy, ensuring that governance reflects
the collective will and common good.
Democracy is akin to an open invitation for anyone desirous of leadership. However, when the
criteria for candidacy are ambiguous, it can create a problem where the unprepared, opportunistic, and
even the absurd feel empowered to step forward. This provokes a paradox, that while the system exists,
intentionally to empower its citizens, it risks watering down the quality of leadership when the bar for
entry seems too low. Without clear standards, the pursuit of office can shift from a quest for genuine
qualifications to a mere expression of unchecked ambition, often misaligned with the very purpose of
what they’re trying to become.
Imagine democracy as a grand conversation—an inclusive exchange where every voice matters and
every opinion holds weight. Yes, it can be chaotic and at times frustrating, but at its core, it embodies the
belief that regardless of one's background, your voice counts, and your choices can create ripples that
extend far beyond one’s individuality. This sentiment fuels the drive for advocacy among Filipinos,
inspiring them to demand for their own interests.

The Philippines, as an example of a democratic society, empowers public opinion, such as freedom
of speech, the right to assemble, and access to justice. Whereby access to justice is access to political
participation.
In the country, the process of filing for a Certificate of Candidacy (CoC) is indeed accessible;
meeting basic requirements like citizenship, age, residency, and literacy is all it takes. Although this
openness may be a triumph of democratic ideals, it as well raises questions about potential vulnerabilities.
Thus, we are naturally led to ponder: are these vague standards a flaw in the democratic framework, or do
they reflect a deeper, essential aspect of democracy itself?
Plato on democracy

Tracing back history, many ancient Greek thinkers, particularly those who were skeptical of
democracy, believed that such a system could produce demagoguery. This was rooted in the idea that the
unchecked power of the masses, when swayed by emotions and passions, could lead to the rise of leaders
who manipulate public opinion for personal or political gain. Hence, the emergence of the demagogues.

Plato, a known critic of democracy, expressed his argument using the analogy of Ship of State.
Imagine a ship where the owner is strong and imposing but totally clueless about navigation. The sailors,
each with their own ambitions, are fighting to take control of the ship, using flattery and manipulation to
win over the people. Meanwhile, the actual navigator—the one who really knows how to steer the ship
and has studied the stars and seas—gets completely ignored. In this metaphor, the owner of the ship
represents the citizens in a democracy; the sailors, the demagogues and; the navigator, the philosopher
king.
Plato argues that governance, like navigation, requires specialized knowledge. Just as it would be
absurd to let anyone steer a ship without training, it is equally dangerous to entrust governance to those
chosen by popular vote rather than merit. Democracy, in Plato’s view, allows the unqualified to wield
power simply because they can appeal to the masses.
In this, Plato uses the analogy to advocate for a system led by philosopher-kings—rulers who,
through rigorous education and moral training, understand the principles of justice and the common good.

While the idea of putting Philosopher Kings to operate on the ship’s destiny has an appealing ideal,
the Philippines would need to transform its system of governance for it to materialize. Transformation
does not happen in one swift, it requires years of evolution, often times through revolution. Another,
leaders who rule by reason and virtue may lead to concentrating power in an elite, potentially leading to
authoritarianism, and oversimplifies the complexities of human nature.

Truthfully enough, there is no such thing as a system of governance that is beyond reproach. While
democracy is often condemned by many political and philosophical thinkers, modern political thought
prefers inclusivity, for almost everyone wants to have a say on the higher podium.
Summary

Public office requires more than just popularity, it demands the ability to make informed decisions that
affect millions of Filipinos.

Who is truly qualified to lead? This issue is important today, as more and more candidates with
little to no experience in governance are stepping into the political arena. As the filing of Certificates of
Candidacy (COC) begins, they are entitled to the same rights to run as any other individual is to vote for
them. However, promoting voting wisely in the upcoming elections is not enough as boxers, a former
actress, famous stars, a known thief and plunderer, content creators, and entrepreneurs are the candidates
for a position in governance. While fame can generate votes, it doesn’t necessarily translate to good
governance.

The requirements for a successful job application in the Philippines, according to Mr. Kennedy
Flores, an instructor at Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University and a former human resources
professional with experience in the BPO industry, centers around three important qualifications which are
academic pedigree, experience, and moral fiber. Academic background is crucial, particularly for jobs
requiring specific technical knowledge aligned with the role's responsibilities. His own experiences
applying for positions at Saint Louis College and Don Mariano Marcos Memorial State University
recognized the emphasis on educational qualifications, especially in higher education institutions.
Experience is equally important, as it provides valuable insights and facilitates smoother adaptation to
new roles and environments. Finally, moral fiber, encompassing values and principles, significantly
impacts a company's direction and success.
These qualifications are different from the qualities often emphasized in Philippine political
campaigns. While job applications prioritize civil service eligibility, certificates, academic background,
and experience, political candidacy requirements are minimal, focusing on literacy, voter registration, and
citizenship. Popularity, rather than merit, often determines electoral success, as evidenced by the
candidacies of individuals from diverse backgrounds, including boxers, former actresses, and even those
with criminal records. This discrepancy leads to a situation where individuals lacking relevant education,
political knowledge, or experience can still win elections.
He agrees that job requirements are far more demanding than those for political candidates. His
personal experience filing for candidacy as a former Sangguniang Kabataan Chairperson was significantly
easier than applying for a position at DMMMSU, emphasizing the difference in the application processes.
While the latter involved extensive paperwork, interviews, and examinations, filing a Certificate of
Candidacy simply required completing a form and gaining COMELEC confirmation.

Mr. Flores defines "merit" in both professional and political leadership as a combination of
academic achievements, work experience, and strong moral character. While easily assessed in
professional settings, merit in political leadership is less evident, often overshadowed by popularity and
charisma. He rates the current system's effectiveness in measuring merit at a low 2 or 3 out of 10, citing
flaws in the system and instances where candidates with ongoing legal cases still win elections due to
their popularity.
The deficiencies in the Philippine community include rampant susceptibility to fake news, a lack of
awareness, and insufficient political education. This vulnerability is exacerbated by candidates who avoid
public debates and platforms, further hindering informed decision-making by voters. He suggests
strengthening the educational system by integrating election-focused education, improving laws to
prevent unqualified individuals from running for office, and encouraging greater public involvement to
promote awareness and accountability.

Regarding Plato's concept of philosopher-kings, Mr. Flores acknowledges that while some Filipinos
do prioritize wisdom and virtue in their leaders, popularity voting remains prevalent. Cultural factors,
such as regional biases, also significantly influence electoral choices. He advocates for choosing leaders
based on competence and merit, emphasizing the need for sound policies and sustainable solutions to
address pressing national issues rather than relying on popularity or short-term, unsustainable programs.
Addressing the question of how to initiate change despite persistent challenges, he emphasizes the
importance of action following discourse. He proposes a five-step process (A.D.D.A.A.): Awareness,
Discipline, Decision, Action, and Accountability. This process encourages individuals to become
informed, take responsibility, make informed decisions, act accordingly, and accept accountability for
their actions. He also recognized the power of collective action, citing the success of the free higher
education movement as an example.
Regarding how to raise consciousness among those trapped in a system of oppression, Mr. Flores
draws parallels to Plato's Allegory of the Cave and the works of Dr. Jose Rizal. He identifies the
importance of exposing individuals to alternative perspectives, fostering critical thinking, and promoting
comparative analysis to identify flaws and advocate for change. Just as Rizal used the Spanish language to
reach a wider audience and expose injustices, creating national consciousness, today's citizens must
similarly strive to broaden perspectives and promote critical thinking to effect meaningful change. The
process begins with self-reflection, understanding different perspectives, and engaging in discourse to
identify systemic issues. Ultimately, he emphasizes the need for informed action and accountability to
drive into a true change.

The Philippines' political situation demands immediate changes and reforms. We need fundamental
electoral reform, moving beyond the Constitution's permissive approach to candidacies and prioritizing
candidates' skills, experience, and knowledge. Political science students should conduct research on
electoral reforms to inform policy recommendations. Finally, we must uphold ethical standards, not only
as voters but also as citizens empowered to shape our government. Without clear qualifications, we risk
electing leaders who may not fully grasp the complexities of public office. Leadership should be about
serving the people and solving the nation’s most pressing problems not about leveraging fame for political
gain. By raising the standards for candidacy, we can protect our country’s future and ensure that our
leaders are equipped to handle the responsibilities of governance. Candidates should be required to
publicly present their platforms, so voters have a clear understanding of what they stand for and what they
plan to do if elected. By implementing these standards, we can create a political landscape where
competence and preparation are prioritized over popularity, ensuring that those who run for office are
truly ready to serve the people. Together, we can push for a political system that values competence and
genuine public service, ensuring a brighter and more secure future for all Filipinos.

Critical Analysis

This analysis will delve into the possible reasons that lie beneath one’s simple inclination of running for
public office, and how vague qualifications can invite even the incompetent ones. This theorizes the
fundamental question of voting participation and explores the ambiguous qualifications related to CoC
filings as an aspect of democratic practice. This analysis aims to provide additional context for our
recorded podcast.

In the Philippines, where all of us enjoy the blessings of democracy, each of us are in fact suffering
from the curse that lies beneath it. Many political and philosophical thinkers have warned us of the
ugliness that comes with democracy. For Aristotle, democracy equates to mob rule or mobocracy, that is a
rule by the shambolic and people in disarray. Similarly, Stuart Mill sees it the “tyranny of the majority”,
where the rule of the majority becomes oppressive.
 Yet, if we are to reflect on the political situation in the country, there is one that is more or less
neglected, voter’s education. Voting in an election is a skill, not a random intuition. It needs to be taught
systematically to people. Socrates emphasized this on his teachings, but this does not make him an elitist
in the normal sense. He didn't believe that a narrow few should only ever vote. He did, however, insist
that only those who had thought about issues rationally and deeply should be let near a vote. We have
forgotten this distinction between an intellectual democracy and a democracy by birthright. We have
given the vote to all without connecting it to wisdom.

We dwelled on the question of which comes first, an uneducated voter or an incompetent leader.
Upon my research, such is indeed a nuanced question, a classic “chicken-and-egg” problem in political
theory. In Plato’s view, uneducated voters come first, as their inability to discern wisdom results in the
rise of unfit leaders. While Tocqueville suggests a cycle: uneducated voters elect poor leaders, who, in
turn, fail to improve societal conditions, perpetuating voter ignorance. Such is a dilemma for nearly every
democratic state.

Creating civic and political consciousness in the Philippines

In our Political Theory course, we were once given the task to read a book and thereafter, make a
review about it. Freire’s critical pedagogy is one of the best reads we have finished. It is a book that offers
a manual on how a prisoner from Plato’s Allegory of the Cave may free himself from the shadowistic
propaganda. It leads us to ponder how we would instill awareness to the Filipino populace.

During our discourse with Sir Flores, he created his own formula on putting words into actions. His
formula includes that of instilling awareness among the people. The dilemma as to which exists first,
uneducated voters or unfit leaders, invariably boils down to voter’s education. That being said, humans
naturally have biases. These biases challenge the project of creating political consciousness to people.

In relation to our topic, it’s true that qualifications for filing a candidacy are easier than applying for
employment. However, the unfit candidates, even if they have the means for running for office, have zero
chance of being elected, if the voters hold their standards high. Populistic sentiments like emotional
appeals and sensationalism will not work if the populace is educated. Populism thrives in environments
where voters are disenfranchised, as leaders can easily exploit frustrations with promises of simplistic
solutions. It is fed when uneducated voters respond to emotional appeals rather than critical analysis.
Civic and political ignorance fuels their susceptibility to manipulation, and that of which enables the rise
of demagogues or incompetent leaders.

Then, should the government impose stricter requirements? First of all, imposing stricter
requirements will only cause more problems than it will solve. This is why the constitutions of most
democracies around the world don't implement it. What applies to the candidate also applies to the voters.
That's because just as you think one has to be a college graduate for that job, then the ones who vote for
him over another can only make that informed choice if they're college graduates, too.

Now, back to civic and political awareness, creating consciousness not only benefits the individual
but ultimately, the whole society. But it remains to be a challenge to every democratic state.
As we have written in the opening paragraph, Freire’s critical pedagogy helps dismantle the matrix
that we have mentioned in the podcast. Majority of Filipinos are known to disregard the essential
questions on politics. Personally, my political inclination is least prioritized, which is ironic given that I
am a Political Science student. If this is the case for me, what can we expect from the average person?
It is undeniably right with what Sir Flores said, that we can't change something that we do not
know. We cannot fear something that we’re unaware of. So, it invariably begins with individual
consciousness. However, there is a paradox. How are we going to create consciousness among the people
when even their tool for thinking is molded by the very system that influences their perceptions?

Conclusion

In conclusion, filing a COC is an act of boldness, whether you’re a seasoned politician or a

first-timer with nothing but ambition. Filing candidacy has become a stage where every kind of aspiration
plays off, as long as they possess the qualifications provided by the Constitution. A reckless jump into the
unknown, driven by ambition, ego, or sometimes by sheer delusion. However, it’s no longer sufficient to
simply show up and coast off by name recognition or celebrity status.
The requirements for filing COC in the Philippines have been deemed inadequate in ensuring that
only qualified and responsible individuals ascend to positions of power. This lack of stringent
requirements and oversight raises deficiencies about the effectiveness of the electoral process, leading to
the perpetuation of political dynasties, corruption, disengaged electorate, and at worst case it facilitates
the easy access of incompetent individuals to hold political power. Insufficient educational requirements,
inadequate background checks, ambiguities in the definition of qualifications, and limited public
engagement also contribute to this concerning trend. Will we continue to see the same old names, the
same old faces, walking through the aisles of power, while the real issues remain neglected?
On a final note, while we joke about the recently concluded filing of candidacy, it is time to
reevaluate and reform the candidacy requirements to ensure that only those who are truly qualified and
committed to public service are allowed to run for office. By strengthening these requirements,
establishing a higher standard can help restore public trust in the electoral process and ultimately lead to
more effective and accountable governance in the Philippines.