Much expected change

One of the campaign platforms of Duterte that has undoubtedly won him a lot of supporters and contributed to his victory in the last election is the proposal to change our form of government into the federal system. It is almost one year now since he assumed office but Congress has not yet taken any step to revise our Constitution for this purpose. So, people are expecting that when it resumes session in May, Congress should already initiate steps to revise our Charter either by constituting itself into a constituent assembly or by calling a convention by a vote of two thirds of all its members. By a majority vote, it can also submit to the electorate the question of calling such a convention (Section 3, Article XVII).

Of course, aside from Congress, revision of the Constitution can be proposed directly by the people through initiative upon petition of at least 12 percent of the total number of registered voters, of which every legislative district must be represented by at least three per centum of the registered voters therein (Section 2, Article XVII). Considering however that changing our system of government calls for a re-examination of the entire document to determine how and to what extent it should be altered, Charter change could be expedited and would be more thoroughly studied and deliberated if it is Congress who will initiate it, either by assembling as a constituent body or by calling a constitutional convention.

To ensure that the revision is well thought out and carefully studied, and as already suggested, the President can even create a commission of experts in law and the Constitution which will draft the proposed changes that will be submitted to, and adopted by Congress or to a Constitutional convention. This process seems to be a more expeditious and wise move.

Under the federal system of government, a federal constitution will be drawn up dividing the entire Philippine territory into several sovereign states with specific boundaries which will then confederate and form a Union for the purpose of presenting to the international community, the appearance of a single state with its own Executive, Legislative and Judicial departments. So every citizen of each particular state under the Union will therefore owe obedience to two governments: that of his/her own state and that of the Federation. Each state under the Union will retain the rights and power of internal regulation and administration or at least of local self government.

Under this set-up therefore, the constitutional limits of the authority of the federal government and of each state of the Union should be precisely and clearly defined. But in case of dispute, the power to decide should not reside in any of the governments. There must be an “umpire” independent of both. The ideal set-up in this connection which can be used here if we adopt a federal system of government is that of the United States. In said country, there is a Federal Supreme Court of Justice and a system of subordinate courts in every State of the Union before whom such dispute shall be resolved and whose judgment in the last stage of appeal shall be final. Every state of the Union and the federal government itself, as well as every functionary of each, is liable to be sued in those courts if they exceed their powers or for non-performance of their duties. Hence, like in the US, the highest federal tribunal is supreme over both the state and federal government when it comes to declaring that any new law made by them or any act done by them exceeds the power assigned to them by the federal constitution and is therefore invalid. The Supreme Tribunal also decides all disputes between the federal and state governments or between a citizen of one state and the government of another as well as administer international laws like that of an international tribunal.

Under the federal system of government, the Union and each state also have their own executive and legislative departments. The executive department of the federal government carries out and enforces the federal laws and ensures the delivery of basic services provided by federal laws to every citizen. It is headed by the President who is the head of the federal state and chief executive with the power of appointment, the power of supervision and control over the federal departments, commander in chief of the armed forces of the federal union, maintain foreign relations and make treaties with other nations. The state of the union on the other hand is headed by a governor who has power of internal regulation and administration for each state of the union.

Obviously, under the feral system, the powers and functions of government are decentralized and widely distributed. And one of the effects of this decentralization is the improvement of peace and order within the communities of the federal states because each local government of the state can concentrate more on this problem. As a consequence progress and prosperity can be achieved easily and expeditiously. Another immediate advantage is the countryside development that will eliminate congestion and over-concentration of population in certain areas like the National Capital Region under our present form of government. Such decongestion may even provide solution to the perennial traffic problem we are now experiencing her in “imperial Manila.” Informal settlers clogging the metropolis will even be encouraged to go back to their place of birth because of more opportunities to improve their lives thus eliminating the problem of poverty.

The proposed federal constitution must however also take into consideration practices and adverse conditions now existing in our country which may offset or prevent the realization of the beneficial effects of federalism. Prominent among them is the duplication of functions especially in the legislative department. Maybe it would be less expensive and more efficient if Congress will be converted into a unicameral body. Then also federalism may just strengthen the existing political dynasties by enlarging their areas of power and influence and thus promote more graft and corruption in their territories. So the federal constitution must also eliminate political dynasties.

* * *

Email: [email protected]