A Digong tactical for federalism

Ian Alfredo Magno

ALTHOUGH apparently reluctant in running for the presidential post more than a year ago, President Digong’s then campaign slogan was as clear as daylight–war against drugs, and federalism.

In fact, even prior to the filing of his certificate of candidacy as a presidential contender, President Digong had already begun his provincial and national sorties, which were aimed at increasing awareness, and thus championing the idea of transitioning from the present republican form of government to a federalist set-up.

In retrospect, it was probably through such provincial engagements that he was able to accumulate a mass base who, by the way, easily connected themselves to that pseudo action hero, gun-slinging toughie who also effortlessly sounded like the average loving grandpa.  Who among the chief-executive-wannabes could have topped that?  Anyway, it’s all water under the bridge.  And that is not the point.

So what is?

The point is, the shift to federalism, as a policy of the Duterte administration, (supposedly) shares the same – if not a higher – priority status than the anti-drug campaign.

Paradoxically, however, since President Digong’s assumption to post, the federalism chip seemingly took a backseat as the anti-drug campaign gained momentum.  As we know, the anti-drug portfolio had undergone several versions by far (double-barrel; reloaded, palit-ulo as reported, etc.), while the policy of shifting to a federalist form of government remained an intangible, sort of elusive, idea, so to speak.

Then again, federalism ought to be the ultimate priority of the Duterte administration if it is to initiate a lasting change that could usher the Philippines to a new frontier.

Among others, no less than the geographic set-up of distantly separated islands dictates a localized (which is a rather quicker) response to the pressing domestic concerns of a given vicinity.  Obviously, it would unload the existing national government from impossibly responding to all the varied predicaments of an entire nation.  In effect, it would also unshackle the larger constituency from the so-called “Imperial Manila.”  The bottomline: regions are empowered, development is decongested from Mega Manila and the National Capital Region, and local participation to governance is crucially enhanced.

Meanwhile, except for anomalous rallyists who hilariously take the streets without actually understanding the cause of their picket (save for the talent fee and the free lunch), genuine and lasting support to the idea of federalism could only be garnered from a constituency that understands the dynamics. Thus, a great deal of nationwide education campaign on federalism should have been sustained up to now.

In fact, recent reports that the Palace is now open and ready for debates on federalism are actually a very welcome development.

Now they’re talking.

However, there is a caveat.

While the President has the unprecedented backing of the people, it also appears that this country is practically divided in various fronts like never before – the worsening conflict versus the NPA; the apparent excesses of the police force as unearthed by the Jee Ick Joo kidnap-slay; the issue on death penalty; and fears, however displaced it may seem, of a possible declaration of a martial law, among others.  These subjects, taken together, might ultimately take its toll on the policy of transitioning to federalism.

To illustrate, the opening of the 1987 Constitution is a very delicate matter to call. In a nutshell, it requires the full trust of all concerned. If, for instance, the administration is perceived as being incapable of putting a stop to the legitimate excesses of its own ranks in the police force, and at the same time floats the idea of a martial rule, how then could it assuage the qualms of institutions and the public at large who hold the power of the ballot, in case a plebiscite takes place to unbolt the 1987 Constitution–for the purpose of amendment or revision, rather vulnerably so to speak?

Just like in a game of chess. You cannot press your wood all at once. You push (the attack for) some, you reposition some–for the same ultimate goal– a checkmate. Conceivably, therefore, it appears that it might be tactically clever for this administration to take it easy and “reposition” a program or two as it attempts to “push the attack” of the Federalism piece.  Very much like in the game of chess, the skillful grandmaster at times sacrifices a valuable piece to tactically snatch a checkmate for the ultimate victory.

Putting this analogy into perspective, “Change” is the battlecry of the Duterte administration. Change, we support. In sum, it ought to be borne in mind that federalism, being the major contention of President Digong’s pre-campaign sorties, precedes more than any other policy of his administration.  After all, a Philippine federalist set-up is the best canvass to “paint” such change on–if it is intended to go down in the annals of history as a lasting gift to the Filipino people.

• •

Belated happy birthday to my parents Papa Fred (March 5), and Mama Neneng (March 17). God bless you!

(Ian Alfredo T. Magno is a lawyer based in Cagayan de Oro. E-mail ianalfredom@gmail.com)