Part 4: Framework for federalism

IN last week’s Part 3, we proposed enacting four laws (the preconditions) prior to revising the 1987 Constitution. Once in place, a framework for federalism can be written in the revised Constitution as a constitutional pathway even beyond the term of President Duterte. Federalism as a solution for the systemic deficiencies in the country requires the collective energy of its adherents and the commitment of the bureaucracy to inform and educate the great masses of our people on its nuances and advantages. The messaging should give substance to what was once a formidable slogan cloaking it with a pragmatic step-by-step process.

To reiterate, federalism is the type of government where power and authority are not centralized but shared between the national central government (federal) and the regional governments (states). This system allows states to develop themselves the way they see fit based on their culture and specific conditions. Some areas of public life are under the control of the federal government (security and defense, money and coinage, diplomacy and foreign affairs, etc.). Some are left to the states (education, revenue generation and taxation, franchises licenses, and permits, etc.), and some are shared (raising taxes, borrowing money, criminal justice, etc.). These are all to be guaranteed in the Constitution.

Federalism is a multi-step process that must be clearly written in the Constitution. We can’t just legislate federalism or just write in the Constitution that we are a de facto Federal Republic tomorrow. What can be written is the framework, the road map as it were to attain the Philippine Federal Republic; beyond the term of DU30 and even in the next decade or so. So even with the Deegong gone from the political scene, we will have planted today the seeds of our Federal Republic.

Creation of autonomous territories

The Centrist proposal’s version has its roots on the concept of autonomy, subsidiarity and self-determination. Initially, we allow the existing provinces and highly urbanized component cities to evolve first to an autonomous territory with the decision to group themselves coming from the grassroots level (pinatubo). “Self-determination” is central to this decision. In other words, the citizens within a contiguous territory, with common language and culture must decide in a referendum that they become completely autonomous. Petitions are then passed by their local legislative assemblies.

Once a referendum is passed, within a year, parliament (or Congress) must enact an organic law defining the autonomous territory’s land area, powers, obligations and sources of revenues (taxes), mindful of the components’ economic viability. The autonomous territory then writes its own constitution to be approved in a plebiscite by its own people.

The Philippines may eventually end up with from eight to 12 federal states. Parliament can’t impose on the current provinces and cities but can give general guidelines on how states are formed based on criteria to be embedded in the revised Constitution (i.e. common culture, language, custom, contiguous areas and economic viability). Therefore, it is necessary that these contiguous provinces and cities need to negotiate among each other.

If three-fifths (60 percent) of the provinces and component cities of the Philippines become autonomous territories, then the Federal Republic of the Philippines is created.

Congress recently enacted into law RA 11054, an Organic Act creating the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM). The BARMM also adopted a parliamentary form where the executive and legislative bodies are fused. It could be the template by which autonomous territories can be created all over the country not by the sufferance of Congress but through the revisions of the 1987 Constitution.

Mode of changing Constitution

A critical consideration in the writing of the new constitution is the participation of Congress. Under the current 1987 Constitution only three modes are allowed: people’s initiative (PI), constituent assembly (ConAss) and a constitutional convention (ConCon).

1. PI is eliminated as the constitutional changes being contemplated are not mere amendments but a revision of the 1987 Constitution.

2. ConAss will involve the members of Senate and Congress writing a constitution. With 80 percent of congressmen and senators members of political dynasties and allies of the oligarchy, the finished product will be highly flawed.

3. The third option therefore, ConCon, could be the better alternative, provided a combination of elected delegates is balanced with the appointed chosen delegates of the President.

Most of these elected delegates would be the moneyed few, members of political dynasties whose clans and family interest take precedence. The chosen appointed constitutional experts even from the marginalized sectors — who could never afford and win an electoral campaign, can counter and balance these dynasts — and give the presidential agenda a chance to be debated and pondered upon well.

Case for federal-parliamentary system

Empirical evidence shows how countries under the presidential system have serious problems of corruption, development and peace. Consider the following:

1. Nine out of 10 countries in the 2015 Transparency International Corruption index’s most corrupt/least transparent countries are under a presidential system, with Iraq the lone exception that has a federal-parliamentary form.

2. And five of these are ranked the least peaceful nations in the world, according to the 2015 Global Peace Index (GPI).

3. Similarly, in nations with the highest Terrorism Index, more countries have a presidential form (Afghanistan, Nigeria, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, the Philippines) while the rest have parliamentary governments (Iraq, Pakistan and India).

With our unitary-presidential system, the Philippines ranks among these countries: Somalia, North Korea, Afghanistan, Sudan, South Sudan, Angola, Libya, Iraq, Venezuela and Guinea-Bissau; followed by Syria, Yemen, Central Africa Republic, Ukraine and Libya.

Least corrupt countries (the better ones)

In contrast, all of those in the top 16 “least corrupt” nations are under a parliamentary system, with the exception of the United States (presidential-federal); and these are also the 16 most prosperous nations in the world. They lead in curbing corruption and ranked high in human development in the 2015 UNDP human development index. These countries are Denmark, Finland, Sweden, New Zealand, Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland, Singapore, Canada, Germany, Ireland, the US, Iceland, Luxembourg, the UK and Australia.

Empirical evidence shows that a federal form is definitely better than a unitary system. But clearly it also suggests that a parliamentary system is superior to the presidential form in many criteria of government performance.

Postscript

Last week’s SONA was a total disappointment to the fed-parl advocates and political reformers. DU30, the last hope of the federalists was eloquently profound in his silence on the revision of the Constitution that could usher in badly needed systemic reforms. I will just quote Senator Drilon: “…the non- inclusion of federalism indicates that the Cha-cha was laid to rest…Those who have plans to revive it this 18th Congress should better think twice. It will be an exercise in futility.” Thus spoke the head of the opposition in the Senate. In the end, the Yellows won!

And from the Deegong himself, after his SONA: “…federalism is complicated…it will not happen during my term.” The last nail in the coffin. Federalism is dead, please don’t send flowers.

THERE are things that we seem to be unsure of as a nation, and that is the answer to the question — are we better off now than we were four years ago? Clearly, the answer there would have been yes. Unfortunately, there are some, if the surveys are to be believed, around 3 percent who disapprove of PRRD’s work and 11 percent undecided. A staggering 85 percent trust and approval rating was achieved by the chief executive, a first among all post-EDSA presidents and at such a point in the term of office.

Duterte is not perfect. He loves to joke around even in presidential addresses. He is not from Luzon. Hence, he behaves differently. He is not one of them. Check out his behavior, his mannerisms, his expressions, his ways of dressing up, no presidential demeanor at all. He is just a mayor who never wanted to go out of Davao City because it meant a repackaging, less authenticity and dealing with the oligarchs on their terms. But when the going got tough, he made the jump, hard as it was. But the voters saw in him what was not present in all: he is uncouth, Bisaya, mayor, with a strong political will, brought Davao from the throes of anarchy to what it is today. He saw in them their image of a true leader. And when the mandate has been duly given, no Bikoy or the propaganda line of 25,000 deaths can undo that single democratic act.

Thirty-two issues were highlighted by PRRD in his fourth SONA: fight against illegal drugs, corruption, restoration of the death penalty for heinous crimes related to drugs, as well as plunder; PhilHealth fraud; contributions of GOCCs; reform of Customs; Hotline 8888; Boracay cleanup; Manila Bay rehabilitation; third telco; Bangsamoro; communist rebellion; education from K-12 to ALS; sports development; MSMEs; rescheduling the barangay elections from May 2020 to October 2022; creation of OFW, water and disaster resiliency departments; WPS; fishing deal with China; Reed Bank allision; poverty reduction; wage hike; tax reform; delivery of government services; water shortage; land use policy; Metro Manila traffic; agriculture; coconut levy fund; energy sources; and national security.

What was interesting was the time he spent stressing the obvious to the members of Congress: corruption. Not having the Congress under his control when he started out in 2016, today PRRD has control of both houses. His speaker has been elected and seemingly, the 15-21 agreement holds at the House. In the Senate, 10 of the 12 proclaimed winners in the May 2019 elections have taken their oaths and chairmanships have been approved. In the 93 minutes of his speech, Duterte kept calling out corruption and alluding to the enemy being us. When he included plunder in the restoration of the death penalty, the audience was eerily quiet. When he joked about the epicenter of earthquake being Congress, the laughter was a guarded one. When he referred to the 63 Custom employees and probably it is better to ask them to report to Congress, another silence.

It was a president saying to Congress, in no uncertain terms, that they were part of the problem. The “in your face” barrage to Congress will hopefully result in a less greedy, more for-country legislature in the remaining three years of his term. Imagine if we had a parliament? Then we can have a unified body addressing the issues of the day without much delay and politics because the agenda would be one: clear, precise and time-bound.

The following day, PRRD met with the various local governments, directing them to do their jobs and giving them 45 days to clear their jurisdictions from illegal structures blocking roads and thoroughfares, essentially restoring order and setting the ease of doing business protocols, particularly on the three-day release of permits, licenses and renewals. Again, this is the only time in his term that PRRD can call out his local chief executives. We hope to see the catharsis he mentioned: “Catharsis is what we, individually and collectively, need to do today — not tomorrow but today. Self-purgation followed by the resolve to do what is right and proper, is good for the nation’s health.” Imagine if we had a federal form of government, the head of government at the national level would not have to do these things because the regional heads would have to act or they get booted out. They would always have an excuse, pointing to central government for delay, money and for not being able to perform their jobs.

Fortunately, from among the local government officials, a new breed got into the mix. Imagine an Isko Moreno, Vico Sotto and Francis Zamora coming in from NCR. Then there are Benjie Magalong of Baguio, Ed Labella of Cebu City and hoping the other two cities, Mandaue (Jonas Cortes) and Lapu Lapu (Ayong Chan) would also shake things up in no uncertain terms. Isabela, Basilan Mayor Sitti Djalia Turabin-Hataman is also leading the offensive in Mindanao, among others. The Duterte effect should rub on the city mayors because clearly it is a path for growth and development.

An elected public official would have to build his first 100 days under the budget of the previous one. If there is no budget left, how would the new local chief executive move? Simple, the formula is there: go after the low-hanging fruit and exercise one’s political will to enforce the laws. Those will get you to do many things and contrast you from the former. This will also give the local chief executive’s team enough time to make sense of the financial records left scattered by the predecessor.

We often talk of economic reform. Pushing the envelope in terms of developing the market. We talk of amending the economic provisions of the Constitution. We keep on insisting that to move forward is to open the economy. If we do, can the present system sustain it? And how do we deal with “the enemy is us” metaphor? It is the extractive nature of our politics that make us weak. We cannot sustain our economic gains if our politics remain to be like what we have today. But the shift to parliament-federal cannot be merely a term issue as suggested by the Speaker. When you start with extending-cutting terms, you destroy the whole advocacy for parliament-federal.

And when the single biggest challenge of our time is not mentioned in the fourth SONA, you wonder if the champion for federalism has just thrown in the towel and closed the door. And the afterthought was really damning.

Part 3 – Preconditions to federalism
IN last week’s column (“Part 2: Unitary presidential vs federal parliamentary”), I discussed the need for revising the 1987 Constitution possibly beyond DU30’s term. But the shift towards federalism will be realized only when certain preconditions are met prior to the constitutional revisions. And the speed with which these preconditions are put in place will depend much on the application by DU30 of his vaunted political will and the influence he wields with the two houses of Congress. The remaining three years of DU30’s term provide ample time provided Congress acts now.

The four preconditions are: 1) reform the political party system; 2) initiate electoral reforms; 3) pass a universal freedom of information law; and 4) enact a law banning political dynasties.

The first precondition is the total overhaul of our political party system. Whether the Philippines will remain a presidential-unitary government or shifts to a parliamentary-federal republic, political parties are indispensable. They are primarily formed not only to contest elections and hold power in government, but they must possess an ideological core, aggregating the needs and aspirations of a diverse segment of our society. A party must write and adhere to a unique platform or vision of governance with a set of principles and strategies. This vision defines the ideological identity of that party, and members are expected to go by these principles and strategies. Voters must be given a choice as to who must govern them based on what candidates and their political parties stand for. Unlike today, personalities are selected by the tradpols and financiers with the connivance of the oligarchy and lodged in all political parties and presented to the voters to elect from. Popularity, name recall and “winnability” have primacy over principles, ideals and even decency and personal integrity. Whoever wins therefore primarily serves the interest of these few.

Also, we have a political phenomenon that occurs every presidential election cycle — the lemming-like migration of political parties to the winning President’s brand. This “political butterfly” or the “balimbing” spectacle has been the norm in the modern Philippine political scene, stunting the growth of principled and ideologically anchored political parties. This prevents the development of clear party platforms that are the lifeblood of a vibrant democracy, giving the voters choices as to whom to gift the privilege of governance.

The badly needed political party reforms seek to institutionalize political parties based on the above criteria and norms and which will:

1. Penalize “turncoatism” (or the switching of political parties, “balimbing” or “political butterfly”);

2. Enforce transparent mechanisms providing and regulating campaign financing to eliminate graft, corruption and patronage (corporate and individual contributions); and through

3. State subsidy that will professionalize political parties by supporting their political education and campaign initiatives.

We have currently pending bills from the last few congresses. The Political Party Development and Financing Act (SB 3214, and HB 6551, HB 49, 403 and 159) have been languishing and were archived by the PNoy administration. The current congress can refile these bills.

The second precondition is to initiate electoral reforms that will put in place a system to prevent the perversion of the will of the populace (i.e. rampant vote-buying, intimidating voters, etc.). One of the greatest evils in our democracy is the dominance of the traditional politicians allied to the oligarchy. They rear their heads every election cycle taking advantage of a legal though weak electoral process. The Comelec must be reformed to take on earnestly its sacrosanct role as the “premier guardian of the Philippine ballot,” actively filtering the qualifications and credentials of candidates for public office and the nation’s political leadership, and remove all quasi-judicial work from the Comelec and transfer electoral contests to the judiciary. Electoral reforms in tandem with political party reforms will substantially diminish the oligarchy’s influence in the election process.

The third precondition is the passage of a freedom of information law (FOI) to enforce transparency in all transactions in government (not only through an executive order). This law will allow public access to information (regardless of physical form or format) pertaining to official acts, transactions or decisions, government research data used as a basis for policy development; and compel transparency and accountability in public service by requiring financial information such as SALNs of public officials and civil servants to be posted in government offices or websites. And even the Bank Secrecy Law and the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) should be amended to allow legitimate agencies to compel public officials and civil servants to show their bank accounts in the Philippines and abroad.

The fourth precondition is to enact a law banning political dynasties as mandated by the 1987 Constitution. The immediate passage of an anti-dynasty law will level the playing field and provide equal opportunities to other emerging capable leaders to serve; practice transparent nomination among political parties with candidates willing to contest in the local elections; and most especially, ban the concentration of power to a few dynastic families in the barangay, local and national positions.

These four preconditions will not require the revision of the 1987 Constitution unless Congress, 80 percent of whose members are scions of political dynasties, will again shamelessly refuse to pass an enabling law. Then what should be written during the revision of the1987 Constitution must be self-executory.

If these preconditions are not put in place and we proceed with a transition to a federal government, then we may have a government much worse than what we have now. Consider the scenarios:

a. We will have allowed the same personalities and political parties controlled by dynasties into the federal states, each establishing their fiefdoms, possibly with their own private armies and untrammeled looting of the States’ resources.

b. Control by the local elite and oligarchy of the economy and the political structure will result in regulatory capture of government agencies. This will all be fortified by a patronage system flourishing within a much smaller State area and population.

Once these laws are enacted, we should then proceed to revise the 1987 Constitution toward federalism (with a presidential or parliamentary government). These issues have in fact been debated ad nauseam by Congress for more than a decade. The appearance of the Deegong in the political scene could be the game changer. Never was there a Philippine President who so displayed political impudence as to ram through his agenda down the throats, first of the oligarchy (witness the Ongpin and Prieto business shenanigans), then the inept opposition (Otso Diretso debacle), yet managed to maintain an 80-percent approval rating.

This maverick leader recognizes his political clout. Witness the recent fight for the House speakership where the three leading contenders were all over each other to win his imprimatur. And the public display of canine devotion, kowtowing to the President, with the anointed one bowing publicly to kiss his hand, presages an easy passage of these preconditions into law.

These laws are sine qua non before the shift to federalism (presidential or parliamentary).

Next week: Part 4 –
Laying the framework for federalism

Part 2 – Unitary presidential vs federal parliamentary
IN Part 1 of this series we took DU30’s “Federalism is dead!” with a grain of salt. The Centrist Democrats (Centrists) are unequivocal that PRRD is the linchpin of a constitutional shift from unitary-presidential to parliamentary-federal, his original advocacy. But he may have failed to comprehend that the federalization process may not be realized within his term of office. Also, he dropped the “parliamentary” adjunct after his much maligned “French model” didn’t wash. But he stuck to his overall nebulous idea of federalism; yet long on slogans but short on concepts.

This is understandable for an impatient and driven executive who has the misfortune of being surrounded by some senior political advisers whose appreciation of their jobs does not go beyond the level of sycophancy. This is partly the President’s fault as his stint as a superb local executive, an autodidact in the intricacies of national politics and international relations has confined his recruitment among a coterie of a prosaic circle of associates easily intimidated by a display of his alpha male attributes; thus, inhibiting good counsel.

Meanwhile, the Centrists which have been refining the idea of a shift to federal-parliamentary since the 2005 Consultative Commission (ConCom) of President GMA has produced the Centrist Proposals to revise the 1987 Constitution. This document has not been accorded due importance by the PRRD bureaucracy, preferring instead to divine the Deegong’s perorations and perceptions inaccurately, thus failing to inform, educate and precipitate debate among the masses. The presidential backtracking therefore is taken by the Centrists as a challenge to push through its original vision: a shift from unitary-presidential to parliamentary-federal systems.

For a short tutorial, what we have now is a unitary-presidential form of government where power and authority are concentrated in the national central government (the Center) making the same inordinately dominant. The regional and local government units (LGUs) are subordinate and exercise only such powers allowed to them by the Center, headed by the President. This subservience stifles local initiative and resourcefulness, perpetuates dependency and reinforces traditional political patronage relationships.

In theory, executive power is vested in the president who is the head of government and the state; legislative power is entrusted to a bicameral congress consisting of the senate and the house of representatives; and judicial power is conferred upon a supreme court and in the lower courts created by law. This is the classic separation of the three branches of government handed down to us by our American colonizers. But in practice, our present system is characterized by intermittent gridlock between the senate and the presidency, a clash of super-egos, a systemic anomaly.

One source of “ingrained corruption” is the very expensive nationwide elections where the president, vice president and senators are susceptible to the intrusion of the moneyed class and the oligarchy to finance elections. Such an environment enforces a malicious quid pro quo allowing office holders to recoup election expenses through rent-seeking activities or even outright regulatory capture.

Planning and programs for the communities are characterized by a top-to-bottom approach divorced from the realities on the ground; and impairing gravely the decision-making process. Critical revenues directed centrally and collected locally are invariably expensed from the top; detached from the actual needs below.

The Centrists want an alternative, a federal form of government, a system with clear separation of powers and authority between national government (federal) and the regional or local governments (states).

The federal government aims to establish a democratic system that recognizes the rights of each region to govern itself and pursue its own agenda of progress and development consistent with the national interest. It will run its own affairs and decide its own destiny without interference from the national government. Federalism emphasizes regional and local self-rule and self-reliance in governance, based on the principle of subsidiarity. This means decisions should be made at the lowest level where problems are best solved.

While regional or state governments are designed to be autonomous in state and local affairs, the federal government helps the various regions and states, especially the less developed ones — as in all federal systems in the world.

Federalism emphasizes respect for the socio-cultural diversity of the people and seeks solidarity and cooperation in governance, nation-building, modernization and development. The Constitution will define the powers that may either be exclusive to the federal government, to the states or shared. Universally accepted are federal powers on defense, foreign affairs, currency and coinage and customs and trade.

The Centrists also want to replace our presidential form with a parliamentary government where the legislative and executive powers are fused and vested on a unicameral (or bicameral) parliament; and the “head of government” is the prime minister with his cabinet recruited from among the members of parliament. The president is the “head of state” and is elected from among the members of parliament; and upon taking his oath he ceases to be a member of parliament and any political party.

A unicameral parliament is composed of elected members from the parliamentary districts, plus those chosen on the basis of “proportional representation” by the political party according to the votes each party obtained in the preceding elections. The members chosen by the political parties (party list) shall constitute 30 percent of the total number of members of parliament. The political parties shall ensure that in the 30 percent “party list,” the labor, peasant, urban poor, veterans, indigenous people communities, women, youth, differently abled, except the religious sector, are properly represented. The current “party list” system is a perversion of the German model from whom it was copied. As practiced now, there is no clear representation of the less privileged. This should be abolished.

A parliamentary government is also called “party government” because of the pivotal role of political parties in parliamentary elections, governance and public administration. Our political parties are personal factions and alliances of politicians, united mainly for elections and patronage; they have no mass memberships and no sustainable and exclusive serious platform of government that differentiate them from one another. They are not responsible and accountable for their performance in and out of office.

For these reasons, they don’t have loyalties to their parties and migrate to the political party of the winning president. This spectacle is known as “political butterfly.” As proposed, any elective official who leaves his political party before the end of the term shall forfeit his seat and will be replaced by his political party.

A mechanism to replace a prime minister is for parliament to withdraw its confidence and by electing a successor by a majority vote of all its members. This “vote of no confidence” is a much easier process of replacing a head of government in a parliamentary system than the current impeachment process of replacing a president.

All these need constitutional revisions and may not be accomplished within the remaining term of DU30. But there are critical reforms which need to be done prior to a shift away from unitary-presidential to federalism with a parliamentary form of government.

Next week: Part 3 – Preconditions to federal-parliamentary system

THE President’s pronouncements that federalism is dead is both true and false. It could be dead in the sense that DU30 may no longer spend his political capital steering its complexities through his remaining three years. But if the 1987 Constitution could still be revised, as he has implied, then federalism could still be realized sometime in the future – but without DU30.

It is a pity that the President has abandoned this campaign promise. Such are the vagaries of politics and the impulses of traditional politicians. The proposition that federalism is not ripe because surveys show it remains unpopular and Filipinos don’t understand the concept is simply inane. The President knew from the very start that this complex idea needed to be explained to the public well as this was his main advocacy – the need for systemic change in governance, decentralizing political power and resources to the regions and bring the decision-making process to the lower echelons of government. And he staked his reputation and presidency on this. Having built a large constituency on federalism and having won the presidency as a result, he now has seemingly given up. Very sad! He failed to translate the idea of federalism beyond the sloganeering and could not inspire his bureaucracy to reach out to the citizenry to paint an alternative to the presidential unitary system that has plagued Philippine society for generations. But perhaps, all is not lost.

It appears that remnants of his bureaucracy continue to push through with educating the constituency despite PRRD’s declarations. The Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) tasked to shepherd federalism through the local governments and the masses has declared that it can still be done and has relaunched the campaign. This is a brave thing to do and the DILG could pull it off.

For what it’s worth, the advocates of federalism, including the Centrist Democrats (CD), of whom the author is a prime mover, has made it a lifelong commitment to push for systemic change. Oddly, the CD has always maintained that federalism will come in due time only after certain preconditions are met. And these must include revisions to the 1987 Constitution. All these have been disseminated to Congress, to Malacañang and to the public through the Centrist Proposals. I am reprinting in an abridged format the document (please access www.cdpi.asia and download Centrist Proposals).

When this columnist was asked to present the Centrist Proposals to the Malacañang press corps in September 6 2017, I suspect a copy found its way into the hands of the Deegong, and now I’m sure he read it and even perhaps internalized some facets of the proposals. The Centrist Proposals are unequivocal that federalism will take a little more time than DU30’s term allows and even beyond that of his immediate successor. But the ground work has to be laid down now — at the onset of the second half of his term through constitutional reform.

Grudgingly the President may have agreed with the Centrist position that federalism is a drastic idea whose time has come, yet it has to be translated in a manner that will not cause too violent a rupture in the fragile relationship between the political leadership and the governed. Such relationship has been a consequence of generations-long practice by traditional politicians to subvert the will of the citizenry every election using the proverbial “guns, goons and gold.” And to sustain this hold on power, political dynasties proliferated and an unholy alliance with the oligarchy was inevitably forged. This is a culture that grew out of the petri dish of the presidential unitary system — our current governmental system protected by the 1987 Constitution.

Indeed, every election cycle the governed are free only to elect those selected by this unnatural partnership between the tradpols and the oligarchs. This practice of selecting a menu of candidates for the country’s leadership is the biggest anomaly and deficit of a democratic state that we claim the Philippines to be. Whichever side wins, traditional politicians and the oligarchy remain at the top and in control. Political power shifts only between the two faces of the same coin. DU30 perhaps may be the only leader who broke away from this prototype.

Generations and decades of this dysfunctional symbiosis between the traditional politicians and the oligarchy have entrenched systemic practices perverting good governance. And the President steeped in the lore of traditional politics himself understands that the legacy he is now crafting will result in the ultimate destruction of the very system that allowed him to survive and flourish in the first place. He said so himself. And this is a noble act. He understands too that to destroy the old and usher in a new system of governance, he needed to apply the very tools of that system. This is his paradox. Assault the ramparts of traditional politics with the apparatus and the demeanor of a traditional politician. To make a good omelet, he needed to break a few eggs. But this has to be calibrated. Don’t go yet for the big enchilada — federalism. Go for the doable, the currently possible which the CD have always maintained from the very start is the right path to eventual change. There are preconditions to federalism. This will be discussed in detail in a coming series of articles.

In essence, CD proposals seek first to erode the fabric underpinning the current presidential unitary system. Clarita Carlos, an eminent UP professor and author has detailed this in her book, The Deficits of Democracy. Stark poverty, corruption, inefficiency and rent-seeking activities within government; the inaccessibility of the poor and the disadvantaged to a perverted justice system; and the general environment of malaise and a host of others are a systemic rot embedded in our type of government festering in the body politic.

These are the problems confronting our country today. The next articles in this column will lay down the doable parameters upon which the groundwork for federalism must be put in place. But first, the President needs the concurrence of the two houses of Congress.

Fortunately, the results of the midterm elections allowed him the opportunity to influence to some degree the two chambers of Congress from whence the legal framework for systemic changes must emanate. The Lower House may prove to be more malleable as the current fight for leadership are all headed by personalities who have displayed canine-like devotion to the Deegong. The Senate may be a little trickier as the term of many senators goes beyond his. And then there is the cliché that every senator once seated assumes an aura of self-importance and affectations of independence.

The agenda for systemic changes has a high probability of passage while we have a president endowed with tremendous political capital, however tainted and fractured it may be, and has the political will to act decisively. But this President’s enormous political capital as in anything that is valuable is likewise fragile and could erode. Therefore, the need to act now and fast before his presidency descends into that “lame duck” period, a bane to the powerful who must adhere to legitimate constitutional constraints where political power becomes almost illusory.

SCANNING the headlines and social media the past three weeks, one can’t help being dumbfounded at how we have gone overboard on the Reed/Recto Bank incident. From where I sit, I see the Philippine government preventing “making a mountain out of molehill”; and conversely, the opposition frantically elevating to an Everest size one that is already a mountain. Methinks this is an extension of the elections where the opposition Otso Diretso was obliterated. They needed to find another issue against their bete noire, the Deegong. And in the process transform this maritime faux pas to polarize the country, the DDS and fist pumpers on one side against the yellow hordes on the other, leaving the majority of our people perplexed as to where we are all heading. First blood was drawn by the opposition (and some allies) suggesting government should invoke the US-Philippine Military Defense Treaty (MDT) on the sinking of the Gem-Ver. The thesis of the opposition is that this is a gross infringement of Philippine sovereignty and therefore, in indignation, the President must defend our honor.

And where was the President in all of this? Practically on the sidelines weighing his options before wading in. This could be the prudent move. I don’t often agree with the “mouthslinger from the south,” quick to the verbal draw replete with curses and p—–ina. But this time, he tamed his inner demons by his momentary silence. But the Yellow forces would not allow him an inch, accusing him of playing to his new Chinese friends against the better interest of his countrymen. But they are wrong. Deegong was following his playbook and a tactic that could give him better hold of his sensitive relations with China. Dealing with a bully does not call for a linear response, as the President knows very well, being adept at the craft of intimidation himself.

If memory serves, during the tragic Rizal Park hostage crisis of PNoy in 2010, an ex-policeman hijacked a tourist bus and with the intervention of the Filipino “elite kuno SWAT,” resulted in the massacre of eight Chinese citizens. As this was with full TV coverage for several hours, an international uproar ensued. And what did the Chief Executive of Hong Kong, Donald Tsang, do? He was “silent” — except for a formal protest through proper channels. This is diplomacy. Similarly, the Deegong may have understood its nuances, commenting only when things are clearer.

And then the Deegong opened his mouth. “This was just a minor incident and China can fish in the Philippine waters…because we are friends.” Then the s–t hits the fan.

Mr. President, this is not a question of friendship. This is international diplomacy where leaders do not speak personally for themselves but collectively for the people. This is not a Davaoeño’s informal concept of “ato-ato ra ni, istoryahan na lang nato ni!” (Let’s just talk informally by ourselves.)

“Chinese can’t fish in PH territory” (The Manila Times, headline June 27, 2019). “Letting Chinese fish in PH waters hit as illegal” (Philippine Daily Inquirer, headline June 27, 2019). “The Philippine government cannot allow Chinese fishermen to fish in the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone in the West Philippine (South China) Sea because it will violate the Constitution” (Supreme Court Justice Carpio). “Impeach Duterte, Palace dares critics” (The Manila Times, headline June 28, 2019).

I will not add to this cacophony and argue for or against except to put in proper perspective the sorry state of the presidency and the knee-jerk response of the President’s men. All the senior people from the foppish spokesman to the normally sober SecDef to the tactless first diplomat (calling VP Robredo “boba”) to the “Uziseros” Cusi and Piñol contributing to the chaos by saying one thing and reversing themselves — to where the President leans. And where is the NSC Adviser Hermogenes Esperon in all this? His silence is deafening. He should be in the forefront wading in the muck. You can’t allow the President to talk his head off by his lonesome. The Deegong needs a “heat shield” to deflect all sorts of criticism and attacks. This is the job of the President’s alter ego on matters of national security.

In short, these senior people don’t serve the President well if they remain “loyal yes men” — unable to give good advice to the Deegong, even if such is contrary to his position and inviting his wrath.

Enough already! The President’s marionettes and court jesters should just shut up and revert to the country’s pressing problems that impact more heavily on the Filipinos’ daily lives. I refer to a scam that has been ongoing for years. KAPA, a Ponzi scheme, needs the attention of the Office of the President badly as this is eating into the sinews of his primary base — the poor and downtrodden.

This onerous money-making scheme plays into the Filipino’s desperate dream of riches, an infectious disease affecting both the poor masses and the greedy, mixed in the deadly cauldron of religion. The “Kabus Padatu-on” (make the poor rich, or KAPA) is a religious ministry spreading in social media, enticing the faithful to invest a one-time donation in return for receiving a monthly 30 percent of the amount for life. There is no way any investment in any facet of the legitimate economy or business can offer that kind of return. What is galling is that this scheme has been known to government authorities. In fact, “…the SEC said it issued an advisory against KAPA as early as March 2017, a cease and desist order on Feb. 14, 2019, and an order revoking its registration on April 3 this year.” The SEC declared that KAPA was in violation of Republic Act 8799, or the Securities Regulation Code (SRC). But there are whispers that local government candidates in the recent elections tolerated this scheme to raise campaign funds. But our law enforcement agencies did not do anything until the recent exposure in the press. DU30 should start cutting some heads off.

Similar schemes have reared their ugly head in the recent years. The Legacy Group of companies’ pre-need plans promised doubling your “investments” after a short period of time. The group included rural banks accepting deposits, with company officials dipping their dirty little fingers into it for bogus loans for personal use. Bangko Sentral (BSP) eventually filed charges of estafa in 2009 against the company for offering unregistered securities. What made the scam attractive to others was the inclusion of their biggest victims as a come-on, a former speaker of the House of Representatives who reportedly lost P18 to 20 million.

And these swindles keep appearing intermittently among the most vulnerable sectors of our society — the rural folk. Yet our officials are instead occupied in mulling over the nuances of the Reed/Recto Bank incident, whether DU30’s invitation to China to fish in our EEZ constitute an impeachable offense. But what takes the cake are the Senate President’s profound reflections on “…the difficulty of exclusivity (of EEZ) underwater (as) the Philippine fish could come from China…and (conversely) Chinese fish could come from the Philippines.” Deep thoughts, indeed!

THE ABS-CBN franchise ends March 20, 2020, nine months from today, unless the 18th Congress decides to renew it. Which means congressmen who are in the pocket of the franchisee could now carry out their end of the bargain or extract more concessions. It is often whispered that the grant of congressional franchises is one of the more lucrative rent-seeking occupations in the legislative process. The Lopez family, which owns the franchise, is in a bind. They may already have paid a down payment. But they are in a very weak position. For one, the Deegong doesn’t like them. And he owns Congress. The President from the very start has shown a marked distaste for the oligarchs and their kind, aggravated by their arrogance showing a clear bias for the Aquino candidate and preferential TV/radio time for PRRD’s opponents when DU30 was the presidential candidate in 2016. The President has a long memory.

So, the Lopezes perhaps may hope for DU30 to just go away — disappear, before the nine months is over. But this is wishful thinking. The Deegong is healthy and totally in control of the political structures of this country. So, where does the Lopez clan go from here?

But first a background on the franchise. According to House Bill 4997 introduced on Sept. 11, 2014 by Isabela Rep. Giorgidi B. Aggabao, “ABS-CBN’s first franchise was granted on June 14,1950 under the name Bolinao Electronics Corporation (BEC).” In its various corporate rebirths, it became ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. in 1967 and eventually ABS-CBN Corp. in 1986. The Aggabao bill has been pending since the 16th Congress when it was rushed, as the congressional atmosphere at that time during the PNoy regime may have been favorable to the franchisee. But it didn’t pass muster.

Forty-seven years ago, at exactly midnight on the day the Marcos martial law declaration was announced on Sept. 22, 1972, government troops seized the corporation and its affiliates and imprisoned its president, Eugenio “Geny’”Lopez, Jr., the son of the founder. The airwaves which they dominated fell silent.

Prior to this, the Marcos and the Lopez families shared a storied past which started in the early days of the republic. The politician Fernando “Nanding” Lopez, Sr. started his career as mayor of Iloilo City right after the war. Parlaying wealth and influence, he won as senator but was later recruited as President Quirino’s vice president and later reelected to the Senate. In 1965, Ferdinand Marcos got him as his vice president for two terms — a convenient marriage of old wealth and political power. “By the time martial law was declared in 1972, the Lopez family fell out of Marcos’ favor and was targeted by the dictatorship because of their denunciations of Marcos’ alleged corruption. They were also targeted due to their family’s political influence, being members of the entrenched oligarchy. The position of vice president was dissolved, and the Lopez family was stripped of most of its political and economic assets.” (Wikipedia)

The older Lopez brother, Eugenio “Eñing” Sr., was the businessman in the family who founded the Lopez business empire. This deadly combination of politics and business symbolized by the siblings, defined and nurtured this symbiotic relationship becoming the template for the Philippine oligarchy. Their later mistake, as proffered in countless political literature was to disparage the emerging political chrysalis that was the consort to Ferdinand, who as a young Manileña living with cousins in the residence of House Speaker Pro tempore Daniel Romualdez had a status “higher than servants and lower than family members as a poor relative” (Wikipedia). The old money Lopez brothers were urbane, highly educated and for the older one, Ateneo, UP and Harvard, but they were no match to the emerging greed of a ‘conjugal dictatorship.’

When martial law was declared, Marcos held Geny Lopez hostage using him to pressure the Lopez patriarch into giving up the clan’s business crown jewels – Meralco and ABS-CBN. The latter was a potent asset as it had the dominance of the airwaves used to expose government corruption on one hand, and on the other, intimidate political opponents and extract business concessions from government contracts advancing their business interests. At the beginning of martial rule, the Lopez family with their political and economic bully tactics never did get the sympathy of the populace.

Geny, who escaped prison in 1977 and went on exile in the United States, returned after the 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution, took over the helm of the media corporation and started rebuilding the company, or what was left of it after the 14-year takeover of Marcos crony Roberto Benedicto. By then, political dynasties and a new set of oligarchy had been introduced into the playing field eating into the domain of the Lopezes, but the return by Cory to Geny of ABS-CBN preserved the Lopez competitive advantage.

And the family went back into their old ways. Using ABS-CBN and its affiliates to gain advantage in business and politics; accumulating politicians in their pockets and binding their wills to theirs. But in the process established itself among the country’s well-run companies. In fact, “…in 2002, Finance Asia ranked ABS-CBN as the 8th best-managed company in the Philippines in its ‘Asia’s Best Companies 2002’ survey.” But they never forgot to whom they owed a debt of gratitude in recovering their business “crown jewels” — the Aquino-Cojuangco family.

ABS-CBN went beyond the boundaries of their government-granted franchise. Writ large in legislative service is the dictum, “The primary objective of all grants of franchise is to benefit the public; the rights or interests of the franchisee, are secondary.” This the Lopez Group conveniently ignored and with ABS-CBN as its primary tool supported to the hilt Cory’s inept son to win the presidency in 2010, glossing over his glaring errors and bungling mistakes. In 2016 they went for the PNoy’s alter-ego, Mar Roxas and alienated the Deegong. Big mistake!

Today, the tables are turned. ABS-CBN’s franchise is up for renewal for another 25 years. The 18th Congress convening in July will give the franchisee, the Lopez Group, barely eight months to convince Congress that they deserve to operate in the next 25 years. True, the power to grant franchises or extend the same is vested in Congress. But truer still is that behind Congress is the man they have heaped scorn on for long.

Where will the Lopez family go from here? They can start negotiating for the transfer or sale of ABS-CBN lock stock and barrel to one friendlier to the current regime and not entirely antithetical to the family’s interest, biding their time till the Deegong goes. This is the soft approach. Or initiate legal battles and bury the franchise issue deep in legal cases through delays in the courts while heading off Congress in the timely House Speaker fight. I’m sure the Lopez family has over the decades accumulated IOUs with the courts and with the bureaucracy and some congressional mercenaries are just too happy to oblige This is the hard approach. Whichever way, we are in for a battle royale which will impact the body politic for years to come.

IT seems that 2022 is heating up early with about 10 names already being floated in trial balloons, whether publicly or privately. The 10 names cover national and local officials, elected and appointed. Two names will soon be added in the trial balloons depending on some events being completed before December 2020, which is 18 months before May 2022. That would make it a full dozen, with some probably sliding down to vice president if trials are not effective or the needle does not move and gain traction.

Interestingly, it was only during the term of former PGMA that we had both the president and the vice president coming from the same ticket. Unfortunately, the vice president then didn’t have the fire on his belly to make a bid in 2010 and continue what PGMA started. There are several lessons to be learned from this incident about securing a candidate for vice president: Popularity is important and not having any higher ambition is critical, but the VP has to be trained and capacitated.

As the Duterte agenda is completed, there will definitely be some that will not be achieved simply because of time restrictions. One thing is clear, though; we cannot depart from the prevailing economic program. We cannot turn around and set aside the achievements made on enhanced frontline services. We cannot change the infrastructure program. We should be thinking in terms of two terms in selecting a president-vice president so there is predictability, stability and sustainability of policies, program, projects and activities.

As we target an upper middle-class Philippines and bring down poverty from 26 percent to 14 percent by the end of 2022, the infrastructure program known as “Build, Build, Build” will remain pending. The Mindanao agenda will not be completed, and opening up the country via amendments to the Constitution or revising the same to secure a future under federalism will have to be considered. Hence, we should not just look for six years but 12 years. Consequently, we need to seriously look at tandems and tickets consciously instead of risking choosing only a president and hoping 2028 would take care of itself.

Why is Mindanao important? Because it is the food basket of the country; 11 of the top 20 poorest provinces are in Mindanao and the commitment of government on BARMM is a commitment that is generational. Thus, a North-South factor will have to be considered in choosing the ticket. Luzon is 56 percent and Mindanao is 23 percent of total registered voters. Mindanaons for both presidential and vice presidential posts won’t work for the interest of the country. But definitely a candidate for the tandem should be from Mindanao to finish the development of the island and continue the glare of official attention on Mindanao.

The horizon is clear. Continuity is needed to achieve economic momentum. There are things that need tweaking, but the high approval rating of PRRD is given in any of the decision points. The war on illegal drugs is a serious undertaking that needs a whole-of-nation approach and not just government. The same is true with poverty. A continuing urgent task is battling corruption. Institutionalizing “Build, Build, Build” is urgent, so that no administration would make infrastructure development the least of its priorities.

There are two scenarios that should carefully be studied: Should the presidential daughter run immediately after PRRD or in 2028? Pros and cons are being weighed. If she runs immediately after, who will be the vice presidential candidate who can sustain, carry on and finish the infrastructure road map? There are two cabinet ranking secretaries who can ensure what we have started will be completed. One is young and the other has wisdom from being a self-made man. If she follows after PRRD, she would share all the “sins of omission and commission” and will be campaigning based on accomplishments as well as issues against PRRD. Following a father has never been done in presidential history, plus she becomes framed by the politics of the father before she can even decide.

If the presidential daughter decides to earn her spurs as vice president first, who has the positive virtues of PRRD from among the names being mentioned for president? Among the elements of a PRRD leadership brand are decisiveness, political will, compassion and empathy. The four cannot be taught. The first two can be situational, but only a local government chief executive understands decisiveness and political will. Compassion and empathy are ingrained, not learned.

In 1983, Howard Gardner, in his book Frames of Mind, wrote about seven types of multiple intelligences in human beings. Gardner argues that there is a wide range of cognitive abilities, and that strength or weakness in one area or ability does not necessarily correlate to another intelligence. Gardner did not mention leadership in any of his multiple intelligences. However, it is easily recognizable that to be an effective, efficient and productive leader, intelligence is quite naturally required.

As such, there is now growing understanding that there are four kinds of intelligences that directly affect one’s leadership capabilities and methodologies to become a successful leadership practitioner. “A holistic approach to leadership requires knowledge, i.e. intelligence, in these areas: physical (PQ), intellectual (IQ), emotional (EQ) and spiritual (SQ). They are interrelated in that they build on each other as one’s intellectual level increases over time through normal life experiences, academic achievements and professional expertise in our chosen fields.” It has been argued that the order of importance should be SQ, EQ, IQ and PQ. Other quarters even argued that “PQ come before IQ since it is the basic foundation.”

SQ is “the ability to behave with wisdom and compassion, while maintaining inner and outer peace, regardless of the situation.” PQ is personal health and fitness. It is “bodily-kinesthetic intelligence.” The presidency is not an easy job. No one gets out looking young and vibrant. Burn-out is lumped with presidential action.

The country cannot afford another tumultuous presidency. It cannot have a vice president who remains a spare tire for six years. That will be another waste of taxpayers’ money if he or she cannot even assist the ship of state to navigate waves and safely reach shore. Nor can we have a wolf in sheep’s clothing who will, from day 1, plan to oust a duly elected leader. Enough of those days.

We need a 1-2 punch who will work together as a team. A team up that complements each other; one that can read each other because they know one another; a tandem that shares the same vision and mission and that is task-oriented to push the country to a better future for all.

The year 2022 should not be just a campaign for the next president, rather, it should be a campaign for a strong team that can sustain our growth path, control greed, fight corruption, a nuanced approach to battling illegal drugs, nurture a professional bureaucracy and take care of those in the fringes. We need to elect a team that will be good for 12 years so we can finish what remains pending in the Duterte infrastructure and social welfare plans. Free tertiary education and universal healthcare will see full roll-outs by then. Ease of doing business would have taken root. We need to think long-term and get our politics to be less extractive.

“Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.” -Article II, Sec. 1, 1987 Philippine Constitution

SINCE its inception as a political party, the Centrist Democratic Party of the Philippines (CDP) has always been at the forefront of the continuing discourse on federalism.

As one of the active members, and an officer of the organization, I believe that the ongoing dialogues sustained by the support and initiatives of staunch advocates in Mindanao communities with the underpinnings of an enlightened citizenry are on the right tract and necessary. Any discussion, agreement or proposal about federalism that does not involve people, whose sovereign will may not be reflected in it, and whose imprints may be essential for its fruition, is bound to fail. This is why the Centrist position has always been anchored on its advocacy to promote and enhance human dignity as a core value in the design of the political, economic and social order.

Self-determination starts with the individual imbued with freedom and sense of justice embracing a set of doctrines or pillars which support this advocacy. These pillars constitute the ideals of Centrist Democracy in the development of genuine autonomy, the path that leads towards Federalism.

Foremost among these pillars is adherence to a functioning democracy and the rule of law. The leaders “govern upon the sole and intelligent acquiescence of those who voted them to power.” This bestowal of authority carries with it a covenant and a caveat that they are to be servants of the law and not above it. Democracy is not so much as the voice of the people as the rule of law that governs them.

Second principle refers to a social market economy where an educated and well-informed populace engage themselves in a free market system which allows for healthy competition and prevent the proliferation of cartels, oligopolies and monopolies; a market economy with active and vibrant participation of the citizenry in the political life of the community involving a “healthy respect for rules and regulations such as paying the right taxes, recognizing the rights of labor, protection of the environment”; and the role of a strong state to “establish, maintain and protect the competitive environment and ensure a level playing field.”

Third is subsidiarity, the principle which dictates that the power for making decisions should rest on the lowest level structure so that people may decide for themselves on matters that affect them. “Self-determination and being in control of their lives are the features of reverence for human dignity.” What we have now is a highly centralized system of government which “concentrates too much power in the Executive Department” headed by the President, making it ineffective in addressing varying concerns of local government units. Ideally, the latter must be given more control and leeway for self-administration promoting good governance, hallmarks that contribute towards the establishment of autonomous regions, an essential step that leads to a federal set-up.

Fourth is the institutionalization of political parties to make them more responsive and accountable not only to members but to their constituents. There is no mention in the statutes that define the system within which political parties can truly evolve. We need to enact laws prohibiting “turncoatism”, a phenomenon where elected members jump from one party to the other to ensure political survival; laws that regulate campaign spending and introduce legislation to grant subsidy to political parties for campaign and political education purposes.

These principles are embedded in a document collectively called the “Centrist proposals” which contained our proposed revisions to the 1987 Constitution. I was privileged to be a part of the process of preparation, edition and in making the document conform to the desires of our people, publishing a book titled “The Constitution of the Federal Republic of the Philippines,” spearheaded by CDPI President Lito Monico C. Lorenzana with the support of some well-meaning citizens who believe its time has come. While revising the 1987 Constitution, we recommended the aforementioned political party reforms, the enactment of a law banning political dynasties which, if still unpassed, should be written in the revised Constitution as self-executory, the passage of a real, all-encompassing Freedom of Information Act to “enforce transparency in all transactions in government” and electoral reforms that would ensure the democratic will of the people are freely expressed.

In the federal republic that we envisioned, we proposed a timeline with the establishment of a parliamentary form of government to replace the present presidential system and all its attendant ills and inadequacies. Thereafter, in several stages which are now overtaken by events, we proposed the creation of autonomous territories which will comprise the Federal Republic. This proposed constitution had been submitted to the outgoing Congress and the Office of the President that only took a cursory interest on it. Subsequently, PRRD commissioned a body composed of eminent Federalists, constitutionalists and legal luminaries who later submitted a presidential-federal version. With several more proposals coming from several groups promoting federalism and the 17th Congress version concocted by the former President GMA, now Speaker of the House, muddling the seemingly irreconcilable issues advanced by all these parties, the Federalism everyone is talking about may again take the back burner.

There’s a glimmer of hope though when the 18th Congress opens with Rep. Rufus Rodriguez, the CDP president and a true-blue proponent of the federal system, taking the floor to advocate for the latter, in a form which could be acceptable to all especially to his fellow lawmakers who are sympathetic to the President’s advocacies.

Federalism may be a complex process but the discussions should never cease. We need a massive political education around the country with the help of like-minded political parties and individuals, “setting aside differences and marching in a single rhythm,” promoting not merely a system but one that empowers people and enhances human dignity.

THE past three weeks saw the Tulfo brothers’ public roasting over the uncouth and abusive language of their sibling Erwin toward a member of the Duterte cabinet. This seems to be the trademark of the Tulfos, perhaps as a crass display of their alpha attributes, a sense of untouchability due to their political connections and a not so subtle signal that they are a power syndicate themselves — as indeed they may well be as they have acquired a substantial following in broadcast and print media. The siblings have managed to parlay their occupation helping ordinary folk find their voice against callous and unmindful government bureaucrats — a commendable feat. But this time they overdid it when they targeted Social Welfare Secretary Rolando Bautista, a bemedaled ex-military general and a hero of the Marawi siege. This generated an ugly firestorm of reaction from the public and an unexpected rage from PMA Cavaliers, a much bigger power bloc whose tentacles encompass the military and police. This prompted a harsh response from top police chief Director General Oscar Albayalde who stripped the brothers of their security details.

Former justice secretary Vitaliano Aguirre 2nd plunged into the fray, declaring, “I personally know these Tulfo brothers, including Ramon and Erwin…I believe that they are apologizing because they never expected the gravity of the backlash, coming as it did from the military and the police, the sector that the Tulfos could not afford to fight at this time. It is my opinion, judging from my own experiences, if they would be off the hook without them learning their lesson, they would be back to their entitled and arrogant ways in no time at all!” (KatrinaHallare – @KHallareINQ, inquirer.net/ 10:14 p.m. June 07, 2019.)

This column will not exacerbate further this disgraceful situation except to examine a more intriguing topic behind this incident allowing us a peek at the unholy alliance between the entitled members of the media and the police.

The question begging an answer is what government policies cover the privilege of granting security details or bodyguards to elected and appointed officials, bureaucrats, VIPs and those private individuals who consider themselves important. Or worse, the likes of a daughter of convicted drug lord and herself a drug pusher Diana Yu Uy, assigned a two-man police detail for several years.

Ordinary citizens must have witnessed convoys of SUVs in heavy traffic with car “wang-wang,” restaurants or even private parties and public events where VIPs are easily spotted by the number of bodyguards hovering over them with bulging hidden handguns protruding from under their short barong and their ubiquitous earphones connected to miniaturized walkie-talkies; conveying to observers images of collective self-importance. Are these hundreds of local government officials, senators, congressmen and bureaucrats entitled to freebies to secure them against perceived or real threats. Is the ordinary Filipino compelled to pay for their security. Can they not pay for their own safety with their private or stolen funds?

According to Gen. Filmore Escobal, chief of the Police Security and Protection Group (PNP-PSPG), these individuals are typically allowed at least two personnel from the PSPG. Two is minimum as both are assigned in two shifts. If they want more police personnel, they must submit a request letter to the PNP and get approval from PRRD himself. Private individuals get to be assigned police security too by merely applying and requesting for one. Such request is assessed and vetted and when warranted, the requesting individual is granted two policemen, courtesy of the taxpayer.

The Deegong is known to frown on spending public funds for private purposes as the margin between corruption and rectitude is a thin one. And DU30 has declared that even “a whiff of corruption” would not save a bureaucrat. The use of public funds, as in the case of police salaries for private security for the Tulfo brothers and one of their spouses may in fact be anomalous.

The citizenry will understand and accept legitimate protection for the country’s highest officialdom paid for by the people’s money as they are natural magnet for threats. For this purpose, the Presidential Security Group (PSG) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_Security_Group – cite_note-2 was created and tasked with providing protection to Philippine presidents, vice presidents and their immediate families, even when on domestic and overseas trips.

This tradition of creating an elite group from the armed forces or police of countries dates back to the ancient Greek kingdom of Sparta where 300 Hoplites (the famous 300 Spartans) were the vanguards of its fighting force and also for the protection of the king. In 27 BCE Caesar Augustus of Rome created the Praetorian Guard, culled from the roman legions. Even Hitler had to install the Schutzstaffel, the infamous SS.

In France, every French boy would be familiar with the Musketeers of the Household of Louis 14th, King of France made famous in Alexander Dumas’ novels. The membership of this prestigious King’s Guard was reserved for noblemen. In my youth, we were familiar with the characters of Porthos, Athos, Aramis and their leader Comte d’Artagnan.

In the holy city of the Vatican, they have the volunteer Papal Swiss Guards from Switzerland founded in 1506 by Pope Julius 2nd solely for the protection of the popes. Originally these were mercenaries farmed out to countries in Europe able to pay their costs. Currently, the 100 Swiss guards and recruits must be Catholic, single and between 19 to 30 years old.

The US Secret Service under the Department of Homeland Security is tasked not only to protect the US president, vice president and their families but also all living former presidents, their spouses and children under 16 years old. They have an added mission of “safeguarding the financial and critical infrastructure of the United States.” The US also has private guns/bodyguards for hire called the Blackwater Group. They recruit from among retired former Navy SEAL, Green Beret and other superbly trained US select units. They are farmed out to high net worth individuals and even back to the US government.

A model we can emulate is the Israeli system that recruits only from elite units of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) and the Israeli Secret Service (ISS) to guard high government officials. These highly prized professionals are in demand to protect international high-profile clients and the “beautiful people” — actors, entertainers and oligarchs. And like the US Blackwater, these are private businesses.

These examples of worldwide elite groups of highly trained bodyguards have for their basic purpose the protection of their presidents, vice presidents, premiers and their families. They later hire themselves out to protect others.

In the Philippines, this is the job of the PSG. But the police was created to protect all its citizens — not individual persons as bodyguards. It’s high time that our government and leadership define the specifics and their role as regards their job as the country’s law enforcers. The Tulfo incident opened the eyes of many Filipinos that the role of the police must not be perverted to serve those who consider themselves as VIPs, or simply people possessing a delusion of self-importance. In this, their arrogance and subsequent humiliation may have served a purpose.