Federalism and dysfunctional governance

Manny Valdehuesa .

ANY attempt to tamper with our presidential system of government won’t be readily welcomed unless people’s minds and hearts are predisposed for it.

Filipinos can’t be expected to welcome an unfamiliar system of government like federalism. They’re too used to the leader-oriented, personalistic way our society is governed by traditional politicians (more on this further down).

Federalism is unfamiliar territory. Filipinos don’t know what it means or what it entails. They don’t know how it relates to their customary habits and practices, whether it jibes with what they’re familiar and comfortable with.

But the federal advocates seem more eager to have the system-change railroaded through congress than having it understood, desired, or acceptable.

***

They take no account of the fact that federalism is a more advanced form of autonomy; that it works best where people already have experience and discipline in selfule.

If they succeed in railroading it through a Constituent Assembly, it’s not likely that it will operate properly because Filipinos have no experience (nor desire, it seems) in governing themselves.

I’ve said it before and I say it again: The first step in trying to have the federal system adopted should have been to establish its main premise, namely, that it is autonomy in essence, or self-government within a democratic framework.

The second step should have been to get the basic units of government, the barangays, to adopt the ways of autonomy or be self-governing—as already provided by law.

***

But the advocates have not even bothered to have the officials (and the constituents!) understand and comply with the provisions of the laws on autonomy, particularly the Local Government Code of 1991 (R.A. 7160). They should have done so especially at barangay level where the sovereign people are. But they didn’t.

So the connection between autonomy and federalism is nothing but a vague notion to the grassroots. Two decades and a half under the Local Government Code did nothing to democratize society. It merely reinforced the feudal practices of traditional politicians. Trapos!

Look around: Not one of our nation’s 42,000+ barangays can be said to be in control of their officials or self-governing, let alone democratic. They’re just not ready or suited for the civic demands of a sophisticated, multilayered federal bureaucracy.

***

To this day, Filipinos haven’t learned to govern their small barangay. For instance, not even one barangay has exercised the power of Initiative to induce or bring about good governance, nor the power of Recall to discipline erring officials.

How can they be expected to govern a federal state in their present state of ignorance and inexperience? They will only be taken advantage of and manipulated at will by autocrats and oligarchs who are expert in governing without accountability, transparency, or consent of the governed.

Today the chairmen go about their tasks as if they’re “little presidents” or “little commanders-in-chief.” They don’t know that they’re really a “prime minister”—which is the title of the head of a parliamentary form of government (the system prescribed for the barangay government by the Local Government Code).

The chairmen don’t even see the absurdity of calling themselves “kapitan” or “kapitana”—which term is derived from Spanish colonial days when community leaders were real captains or lieutenants of the Guardia Civil; thus “Capitan del Barrio” or “Teniente del Barrio.”

***

A cursory review of pertinent laws will show that the title “kapitan” does not appear anywhere; it is not used except in military parlance. Yet it continues to be used widely throughout the archipelago.

It’s time people (and officials!) stop using it. Because it’s wrong to use this military term to address or refer to a leader of a democratic constituency. It implies that they are superior to their constituents. In fact, they are the public servants.

But no one has made clear to barangay chairmen that their constituents are not their subordinates. No one tells them that their constituents are the sovereign citizens to whom they are answerable or accountable, not the other way around.

But this misuse persists and no one bothers to correct the misuser. What’s pernicious about it is it wrongly characterizes the barangay’s form of government, which is parliamentary and not presidential. It also mischaracterizes the role of a barangay chairman—which is really that of a prime minister, “first among equals.” He is everyone’s peer, not their superior.

***

The Punong Barangay’s job is to preside over the affairs of his community of peers and to implement the laws and decisions of the Barangay Assembly, which is the community’s parliament except in name. But he struts around thinking he’s the little president!

On top of this pathetic condition of dysfunctional governance at the grassroots, the primal level of our Republic, the federal advocates want to superimpose a new, complicated, and multi-layered system.

If they succeed, it will pile up layers and layers of dysfunctional governance in our political system.

We would all be better off if they just focus on letting the spirit and practice of autonomy (and democracy!) take root in every community.

(Manny Valdehuesa Jr. is a former Unesco regional director for Asia-Pacific; secretary-general, Southeast Asia Publishers Association; director, development academy of Philippines; member, Philippine Mission to the UN;  vice chair, Local Government Academy; member, government peace panel during the administration of Corazon Aquino; awardee, PPI-Unicef outstanding columnist. An author of books on governance, he is chairman/convenor of Gising Barangay Movement Inc.. E-mail: valdehuesa@gmail.com)