Finally, a dynasty ban?

The focus of the constitutional commission on curbing dynasty-building is much appreciated by ordinary folks who weren’t born with the right surname and must work 10 times harder to advance in life. Among other things, the concom members have proposed a ban on relatives up to the second degree of consanguinity or affinity from immediately succeeding a relative in the same position.  

It’s a long way, however, from proposing curbs on dynasties and implementation. Congress sat for three decades on the constitutional provision calling for an enabling law to ban political dynasties. Politics is a family business in this country; in many areas, political power and family fortunes are locked in an incestuous embrace.

Instead of passing an enabling law, legislators have been among the most shameless in trying to get their families to control nearly all elective positions in their turfs, all the way down to the barangays and youth councils.

 With no one and no law to moderate greed for political power, dynasty-building has reached obscene proportions in several areas. Politicians field not only their spouses and children and grandkids but also their mistresses and their children for elective posts. Their siblings carve out their own turfs, usually in areas where the clan has some roots even if they have never lived there.

Politicians can validly argue that they can’t perpetuate a dynasty without public support, and they get public support only if they are seen to be performing well.

But support can also spring from patronage, which incumbent officials can dispense liberally using public resources. Having a single clan occupying most of the elective posts in one particular area also undermines the check and balance system that compels accountability and curbs corruption. This kind of control can breed impunity, and the belief that the clan can get away with everything including murder. 

The 2009 massacre in Maguindanao, with the Ampatuans obviously believing they could get away with the brutal execution of 58 people, was just the worst example of what happens when a single family controls the criminal justice system in a particular area. It gives the family invincibility, leaving no room for anyone outside the clan and its circle of cronies and sycophants to shine and compete fairly.

Dynasties are among the reasons for the failure to make economic growth inclusive. They are also among the reasons for the continuing murders, mostly unsolved, of journalists and militant activists.

*      *      *

 The thought of strengthening dynasty building is one of the biggest arguments against federalism. If dynasty building is so shamelessly brazen under the current system, think of what will happen when federalism creates a slew of independent republics all over the country.

 Such concerns, raised by opponents of federalism, must be why the constitutional commission, whose members were handpicked by President Duterte, are including curbs on dynasties in the proposed Charter amendments.

 From a total ban, the concom members have made the proposal more acceptable to the clans, allowing each family to field up to two candidates in every election – one for a national position and another for local.

 The rules will cover ties up to the second degree of affinity or consanguinity, according to concom members. Aware of the situation in the Philippines, the rules also cover illegitimate partners and their relatives.

*      *      *

 The country in fact already has an anti-dynasty law. But because it is limited to the Sangguniang Kabataan or youth council members and has never been implemented, people have forgotten about Republic Act 10742 or the SK Reform Act of 2015. 

RA 10742 states that youth council bets must not be related by blood or marriage up to the second degree to any incumbent elected national official or to any incumbent elected regional, provincial, city, municipal or barangay official in the locality where the SK candidate seeks to be elected.

The law provides that the first degree of relationship refers to one’s parent and child while the second degree of consanguinity or affinity refers to a grandparent, grandchild or sibling. 

The SK has been an entry point and training ground for the youngest generation in a dynasty. So the Commission on Elections, according to one report, is hoping that the law will finally be tested in the upcoming SK and barangay elections.

 Taxpayers would prefer to have the useless youth councils abolished, together with the much-abused party-list system and even the barangays. The impact of the Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion or TRAIN law becomes more painful whenever we remember that our taxes go to the upkeep of the barangay saklaan, the bodyguards of lawmakers and their families, and the junkets of the untouchables in the Department of Tourism.

 While we’re stuck with all the rotten systems, however, we can try to curb abuses. Dirty Rody seems to have a better way of dealing with crooked barangay officials, but he can’t kill them all; the crooks will still be around whether or not the barangay and SK elections push through.

President Duterte is also ambivalent about curbing dynasties. He has already said that sometimes (and he must be thinking of some places such as Davao), dynasties can be good.

*      *      *

 We have to manage our expectations here, and remember that politicians, many of them belonging to dynasties, will have a say in rewriting the Constitution.

 It’s unfortunate that politicians can’t resist injecting political reforms into Charter change, when economic amendments are urgently needed. Any opportunity to advance self-interest elicits a Pavlovian response from our politicians.

 The sight of politicians salivating over term extensions and the lifting of their term limits is enough to doom the shift to federalism – and all the other proposed constitutional amendments.

 Banning political dynasties may soften public resistance. But can our politicians say goodbye to all that?