Collen Anne S.

Pagaduan
POSC12: COMPARATIVE GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS
MIDTERM PAPER
PNOYS TERM EXTENSION AND THE PROSPECT OF SHIFTING TO A
PARLIAMENTARY TYPE OF GOVERNMENT IN THE PHILIPPINES
Recently, there has been a more than usual barrage of attacks on the incumbent President
Benigno simeon Aquino III(Pnoy for short) for his purported seeking of a second term. The
fiasco started when Interior Secretary Mar Roxas expressed his desire for Pnoy to stay on as
president. Many critics argue that in order for him to extend his term, the 1987 constition would
have to be ammended, specifically Section 4, Article VII which states that: The President shall
not be eligible for any re-election. No person who has succeeded as President and has served as
such for more that four years shall be qualified for election to the same office at any time.
Others say that this is in retaliation for the unconstitutional ruling of the DAP by the Supreme
Court(Reformina, 2014). This claim took on a life of its own after the president said that he was
open to amendments if his bosses were for it.
As a political science student, the arguments on whether Pnoy should push for the
amendment of the 1987 constitution (which, according to Cruz(1993),expanded judicial power
vested in the supreme court and was adopted during the incumbency of his mother, the late
President Cory Aquino) to clip the powers of the uncooperative Supreme Court or to extend his
term(since allies claim that he can do much more if he was given more time) have done nothing
but put the spotlight on the weaknesses of the current political system of the Philippines being a
presidential type.
The current system is based on the doctrine of separation of powers. Ideally, the doctrine
intends to prevent a concentration of authority in one person or group of persons that might lead
to an irreversible error or abuse in its exercise to the detriment of our republican
institutions(Abueva,2001). Call it a butterfly effect of the Marcos era, but framers of the 1987
constitution-eager to restore democracy and eradicate traces of the Marcos reign-thought best to
strengthen the judiciary and increase the authority of the legislature in the hopes of preventing
another dictator wannabe. Little did they imagine that the system would be static to the point that
thee three branches are dealing with each other at arms length, preventing any substantial
development years after its implementation. Instead of fostering interdependence, it has fostered
mutual independence. When the president is having a hard time dealing with an uncooperative
Legislature and Judiciary, what is he/she to do? When the Legislature wants to oust a corrupt
president, what are they to do? Resort to the tedious process of impeachment, which according to
Abueva(2001)wastes resources and deters investors, hurting the poor. Has the current system
addressed the problems of wide spread poverty, unemployment, and he like 27 years after the
restoration of our independence? No. Not by a long shot. The system, simply put, is outdated.
Aside from those points, we should also take a look at the quality of our political parties
and the candidates they produce. According to Abueva, political parties in the Philippines are
merely temporary political alliances(2001). Aceron(2009), goes as far as saying that we have
no real political parties. Only fans club of politicians. The thing is that political parties are
crucial to the political process and development of a country. Where do you expect a boxing
champion to lead the Philippines? Were the voters hoping he would fight poverty with his fists?
It is disappointing and dismally frustrating that qualified candidates with experience are overlooked because they are not popular enough. Or handsome enough. Or they have not starred in
enough action movies to be ingrained in the psyche of the star-struck masses. As our
Public Administration instructor has put it, the election process is reduced to face-value and winability of a candidate instead of his competence.

Collen Anne S. Pagaduan

POSC12: COMPARATIVE GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS
MIDTERM PAPER
It is also costly and time consuming to elect the president, on the part of the government
and on the part of the candidates who have to campaign all over the Philippines. Only the ones
who can afford it run for presidency, not necessarily the most competent ones.
It is time to find an alternative to the current system, and the prospect of shifting to a
parliamentary system seems more practical than ever.
In a parliamentary system, there is a fusion of legislative and executive
power(Heywood,2007). The government is drawn from and is accountable to the assembly or the
parliament. Effective, coordinated and efficient exercise of legislative and executive power is
more likely to happen than in presidential systems where the three branches compete over power
and advantage over one another.
The burden of being both head of government and head of state of a president will be
reduced significanty in a parliamentary system(Abueva,2001). The Prime Minister will be the
head of government and can focus on governance, while the ceremonial duties of the head of
state can be passed on to a president selected from assembly. When the cabinet wants to oust the
Prime Minister, they can resort to a vote of no confidence in parliament, reducing the chances of
people power revolts(which investors will take as an indicator of political instability).
The reform will produce a change in the political party system in the Philippines. There
will be greater competition between political parties, and among candidates within the political
parties themselves since they aim for getting a majority(Abueva,2001). The best and most
competent individuals will hopefully emerge from this selection. The representatives will be in a
better position to determine the needs of the citizens by virtue of their education, their ability,
and their track record. It will be faster and less costly to elect the head of government by
choosing the leader of the majority party. One can also rest assured that a competent individual
will be chosen.
A detailed discussion of the expected advantages of the parliamentary system over the
presidential system cannot be contained in a two page midterm paper. In theory, it is practical.
The challenge lies in the translation of the theories into reality- applying it in practice. The
biggest hurdle of the prospect of shifting to a parliamentary system has to overcome is the desire
of the ordinary voter to elect the president of his/her choosing. The ordinary voters will not be so
easily persuaded to give up the right and privilege to vote for the head of government(though it is
taken for granted by many Filipinos), the same goes for the oligarchs and the elites(because they
have much to lose.) It does not help that the democracy we are enjoying now is the result of
the aftermath of a failed dictatorship (Marcos era). Naturally, the voters will want to avoid
another Marcos. That is why the purported term extension of Pnoy and charter change has
been met with a lot of criticism. Can you blame the people for over reacting to Mar Roxas
statement?
There is also the problem of formulating a Parliamentary system that would best suit the
Philippines. Should we pattern it after Japan/UK? That brings up the question of a constitutional
monarchy. Should we pattern it after what Maurice Duvergere calls a new political system
model: semi-presidential system government.? Looking at the three elements of Duvergeres
semi-presidential system government, the country that comes into mind is Russia. That brings
about the prospect of a Philippine counterpart of Putin and Putinism(would we want that for our
country?).
In the end, before we can reform our government system, the electoral process or even
the party politics (or lack thereof), we must first reform our political culture. The best way to

Collen Anne S. Pagaduan

POSC12: COMPARATIVE GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS
MIDTERM PAPER
achieve that is through education. According to Thomas Jeffferson, If a nation expects to be
ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and will never be.