A revolutionary government?
Maybe, it is the lower satisfaction ratings and/or the destabilization allegations that made some government officials float the idea of a revolutionary government, since martial law as defined in the Philippine Constitution does not really give the president enough powers. Some congressmen even said Cory Aquino did this when she took over as president after the EDSA revolution. The parallelism here is suspect, since Aquino took over from a dictatorship that was ousted by people power. Leaving this particular issue to constitutionalist lawyers, there is really much more work to be done, and consequences to be anticipated before attempting to set up a revolutionary government.
The military has to accept the declaration of a revolutionary government. Duterte's pampering of the police and the military is going in the right direction, but is still not an assurance that all three branches of the military will go for it. The military experienced and lived through three people power revolutions and numerous coups, and these may not have been pleasant experiences for them. A broad band of the military cutting across age group and social classes are democratically oriented and may not be keen on the authoritarianism of a revolutionary government.
Then the Congress, Senate and courts may have to be abolished or diminished in power. This means politicians will have to accept their diminished positions and stature, which may not be so easy to do. The governors, mayors and all local government officials have to be replaced or subsumed under the military as what happened when Marcos became dictator. The courts, including the Supreme Court, may have to be neutralized and overruled by the executive department. From an organizational point of view, a revolutionary government is a nightmare, because the existing institutions and processes will no longer be functioning. Maybe the warm bodies in the bureaucracy will remain but they cannot work effectively and efficiently under a new set of rules.
The economic implications of a revolutionary government are also dire. Foreign and domestic investments will dry up, as in the case of Venezuela and other countries under dictatorship. Tourism, BPOs, and OFW remittances will go down bringing with them domestic demand which is the major impetus of our GDP growth in the last 11 years. Consequently, our GDP/GNP growth rate will slow down to the three-percent level and may even go into a recession like in the later years of the Marcos regime. Then our poverty level, which has been going down, will start going up. This will stoke social unrest, which is just what the communist insurgents have ordered to push their extreme socialist agenda. The fastest expansion of the Communist/NPA membership was in the martial law years as injustice and poverty drove many in the urban and rural areas to rebel due to lack of better options.
Going by the experience of Philippine society, civil society and the Church may not also take too kindly to an authoritarian government, and may act sooner than later if there are human rights abuses coupled with economic deterioration. The present criticisms against the Philippine government on human rights violations will increase and isolate us from most countries with democratic governments. Trade relations with the European Union countries, the US, and even with China will suffer, as we lose the linkages in the world markets.
At this time there is only a 25-percent probability of a revolutionary government as its imposition would be problematic and the consequences disastrous. But it is not impossible, given the temperament of the present government. It is also an admission of management failure to govern in a democratic environment.
- Latest
