On federalism (2)

Koko Pimentel

Conclusion

IN the past, the President was a largely ceremonial and powerless position but the constitution of the current Fifth Republic greatly increased the President’s powers. Consequently, the Presidency today is easily the most powerful position in the French political system.

His duties include heading the armed forces, appointment of the Prime Minister, power to dismiss or dissolve the National Assembly, chairing the Council of Ministers (equivalent to the Cabinet), appointing the members of the highest appellate court and the Constitutional Court, chairing the Higher Council of the Judiciary, negotiating all foreign treaties, and the power to call referenda, but all domestic decisions must be approved by the Prime Minister. The President also has a very limited form of suspensive veto.

The term of the President is five years and he can seek a second term and normally secures it, but two Presidents of the Fifth Republic have failed a re-election bid: Valéry Giscard d’Estaing and Nicolas Sarkozy.

While he may just be the second highest official, the Prime Minister is nonetheless also powerful. The head of the government is the Prime Minister who is nominated by the majority party in the National Assembly and appointed by the President for an indefinite term. The Prime Minister recommends Ministers to the President, sets out Ministers’ duties and responsibilities, and manages the daily affairs of government. He issues decrees and is responsible for national defense.

The Council of Ministers or the Cabinet is headed by the Prime Minister but chaired by the President. The total size of the ministerial team is typically 30-40. The members of the Council are called Ministers, while the junior ministers are known as Secretaries of State – the reverse of the nomenclature in the British political system.

In the French system, the relationship between the President and the Prime Minister is critical. It is not always the case that these two individuals come from the same political party and when they are of different political persuasion (as was the case in 1986, 1993 and 1997), the two figures must practice a process of “cohabitation.”

France has a bicameral legislature. The lower house is called the National Assembly while upper house is called the Senate. The lower house has 577 seats representing single-member constituencies. The 2.5 million French people living abroad have the opportunity to vote in one of 11 constituencies grouping areas of the world together. Members serve five year terms.

Members of the National Assembly are directly elected in a two-stage voting system. A candidate who receives more than 50 percent of the vote in the first round is elected. However, if no candidate receives 50 percent, there is a second round which is a run-off between all those first round candidates who secured more than 12.5 percent of the votes in that first round. This is held one week later.

The National Assembly tends to specialise in scrutinising day-to-day government operations. In cases of disagreement with the Senate, the position of the National Assembly prevails.

The Senate, on the other hand, has a total of 348 seats: 323 representing mainland France, 13 representing French overseas territories, and 12 representing French nationals abroad. Many French Senators are also high-level local officials.

The Senate has limited powers compared to the National Assembly. They tend to specialize in constitutional matters and foreign affairs including European integration.

Members of the Senate are indirectly elected by an electoral college of 88,000 made up of city councilors and local officials. Members serve a six-year term and one-half of seats come up for election every three years.

Just like us, France uses a civil legal system; that is, law arises primarily from written statutes; judges are not to make law, but merely to interpret it. The basic principles of the rule of law were laid down in the Napoleonic Code. The highest appellate court in France is called the Cour de Cassation and the six chief judges are appointed by the President. Unlike the supreme courts in other countries (such as the US), it does not have the power of judicial review.

The power of judicial review is vested in a separate Constitutional Court which is a unique creation of the Fifth Republic. The court consists of nine members: one appointment made by each of the President, the President of the Senate, and the President of the National Assembly every three years for a nine-year, nonenewable term. This contrasts with the US system where the President makes all appointments to the Supreme Court but then the appointments are for life.

Although there have been recent moves to decentralisation, France is still one of the most centralised major countries in Europe and the world. France is not a federal state.

That is the French system. But what model do we pattern our proposal for the change in the form and system of government? I propose that we adopt the best features of the governments in Europe, North America, Australia and even Malaysia and adapt them to our needs. We should not also close your eyes to the newly emerging federations in South America and Africa. I am sure that their experiences will be a big help in crafting a federal government responsive to our needs.

Since under the federal system we will be empowering our local governments, we need provide them the needed resources to be able to fulfill their mandate. Towards this end, we propose to increase the revenue share of local governments to as high as 70-80% of all government revenue. This is consistent with our belief that local governments deserve a bigger share of government resources since they are in a better position to address the needs of their constituents. To address the reality that not all states have the same resources and financial standing, there shall be an equalization fund administered by the federal government which shall be made available to states states should they need assistance.

Thus, we must act now. There is no time to lose. If we want to speed up progress and economic development and lay the basis for a just and lasting peace in Mindanao, we must go federal.

Towards this end President Duterte has tasked PDP Laban to take the lead in advocating for a federal system of government in our country. In compliance thereto, the party convened our leaders from across the country in a Conference on Federalism and Charter Change to consult them about moving forward in building a Federal Republic. We have also convened Study Groups composed of experts, scholars, and practitioners to help us craft our party position.

Federalism’s complex nature demands careful study. Scholars contend that there is not one model in the world that fits all. Each country must discern its own version of federalism according to peculiar conditions of their societies. Therefore, it is important to learn from the experiences – whether good or bad – of existing federations.

We do not see federalism to be the cure-all to all our problems. In fact, there is no cure-all to all our nation’s ill. Federalism is not a perfect system; but it may be the answer to the country’s lingering problems rooted in our country’s multi-cultural nature. Maybe it is time to recognize the Filipino identity as a “diversity of identities” and not one single monolithic artificial construct. I submit that it is the recognition of differences that make communities prepared to embrace a common identity with others.

In the end, federalism is not the only step after devolution but it is the next logical step, if the Philippines chooses to further decentralize. And since we should, the decision should be well-informed, well-thought of, and participatory. In the ultimate analysis, federalism is a covenant that is made by citizens, and ultimately the decision to federalize should reflect the will of the people who choose to unite amidst their diversity.

(Excerpts from a speech by Senate President Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III during the Centennial Lecture Series on Aug. 4, 2016.)