POLITICS
Constitutional Continuity and
Change in Japan and the Philippines
T he history of constitutionalism in Japan and the
Philippines is characterized by continuity and
change. Both countries are among the first in the
Asian region to have adopted constitutions in the
early stages of their respective state-building. The Meiji
Constitution of 1889 abolished feudal rule in Japan and
signified Japan’s initial drive towards modernity. On
the other hand, the short-lived Malolos Constitution of
1899 represented the peak of the anti-colonial struggle
against Spanish rule in the Philippines. The annexation
of the Philippines as an American colony and the defeat of Japan
in the Second World War ushered an exogenous influence in the
constitutional development of both countries. The Americans
largely influenced the circumstances upon which both the 1935
Philippine Constitution and the 1947 Japanese Constitution were
drafted under foreign occupation. Nonetheless, the adoption
and promulgation of both constitutions represented continuity
rather than ruptures from the past.
Constitutions, Constitutionalism, and Parchment
Institutions
The interplay between continuity and change is a central
concern in the resurgence of studies on the theoretical and policy
applications of constitutionalism and constitutional design. One
trend in the new literature is to identify the characteristics that
make a constitution durable, stable, and more likely to survive.
The emerging literature on new constitutional research expresses
this concern in two ways. On one hand, recent studies on
constitutional stability and continuity identify the characteristics
that make a constitution durable, thus, more likely to survive.
On the other are works that raise questions of how and why
constitutions change or even fail.
The new literature on constitutionalism has largely drawn
from the resurgence of institutionalism (and it variants) in
political science. Institutionalism seeks to determine the impact
of political institutions upon individuals and the interaction
between institutions and individuals. Political institutions, such as
constitutions, are essentially formal and often legal components
of the state machinery that employ explicit and usually
enforceable rules and decision-making procedures. Constitutions
can be treated as “parchment institution,” which Carey (2000,
735) defines as “formal rules of political contestation that are
written down somewhere as laws, regulations, constitutions,
and so forth.”
Origins: Legacy of Path Dependencies
Historical legacies of the past, more often than not, largely
shape present-day constitutionalism. Institutional choices made
in the past may continue to impact on current constitutional
by Julio C. Teehankee Ph.D.
processes in two ways: first, in shaping the
goals that political actors pursue; and second,
in structuring power relations among them,
privileging some while marginalizing others.
Following the argument of March and Olsen
(2006, 12) that “institutions are the legacy of path
dependencies, including political victories and
compromises. Massive failure is [also] an important
condition for change,” this section will compare the
success of the 1889 Meiji Constitution in paving
the way for modernization in Japan; and the failure of the 1899
Malolos Constitution to liberate the Philippines from colonialism.
The influence of these historical legacies would bear its mark on
latter constitutional developments.
The initial experience of Japan and the Philippines in
constitutional development came in the heels of great political
transformations. After centuries of isolation under the Tokugawa
Shogunate, the Meiji Constitution was promulgated to address
“the demand of modernizing Japan by establishing a parliament
and independent judiciary, and adopting the various aspect of
Western constitutionalism.” (Kobayashi 1999, 5) In the case of the
Philippines, the Malolos Constitution signified the apex of its anti-
colonial struggle and aspiration for nationhood. “From now on,”
Aguinaldo (1898) declared, “we are no longer insurgents . . . From
now on, we are republicans, that is, men of law with whom all
countries may fraternize with mutual respect and affection... that
we be recognized and admitted as a free and independent nation
. . .” Both countries embraced constitutionalism as a requisite for
recognition and participation in the international community.
However, their initial attempt at constitutional development was
momentarily disrupted with the rise of militarism in Japan and
the defeat of the revolutionary movement in the Philippines.
Modern constitutionalism in the Philippines and Japan has largely
been shaped by exogenous influence as both Asian countries adopted
their constitutions under American occupation. First, the Americans
transplanted its constitutional model and design to its former colony
through the promulgation of the 1935 Philippine Constitution. By 1946,
the Philippines gained independence under that charter after forty-eight
years of American colonial rule. Secondly, the victorious Americans, in
the aftermath of the Second World War, “imposed” a new constitution
on defeated Japan. The 1947 Constitution of Japan came into effect
fifty-eight years since the promulgation of its first modern constitution
in 1889 during the Meiji era. Since then, the Japanese Constitution has
become the world’s oldest unrevised constitution after over fifty
years in existence. Meanwhile, the collapse of the 1935 Philippine
Constitution in 1972 ushered in fourteen years of authoritarian
rule. The current 1987 Constitution, the country’s fourth charter in
a hundred years, restored institutional continuity with the previous
1935 Constitution.
 People • Events • Places 
Contested Constitutions
Despite over fifty years of change through political
interpretation, the 1947 Japanese Constitution is currently
the oldest unrevised constitution. In the Philippines, many of
the institutions and processes of the 1935 Constitution have
survived fourteen years of authoritarian interregnum. With the re-
establishment of a centralized presidential democracy anchored
on a majoritarian electoral system, the 1987 Constitution restored
institutional continuity with the previous 1935 constitution that
was drafted under American colonial rule. However, the impulse
towards change has never waned.
Constitutional change has been a recurring political issue
in both Japan and the Philippines. There have been two major
attempts to revise Japan’s 1947 Constitution in the past sixty
years, first in the 1950s, and since the 1990s. At the center of
controversy is Article Nine or “peace clause” of the Constitution
and efforts to restore Japan as a “normal country” with regular
armed forces. In the Philippines, there have been four attempts
under three presidential administrations to force revision of the
1987 Constitution. In the past ten years, debates have been
renewed on efforts to amend the constitution to allow for the
change of the form of government from an American-inspired
presidential system to a parliamentary-federal system. The failure
of successive attempts at constitutional revision in both countries
offers some interesting insights into the dynamics of institutional
continuity and change.

Constitutional Continuity and Change

Constitutions, are not chiseled in stone, neither can
stable constitutions be designed at just any time. It depends
Unit Asia Jazz Concert 2008
on the context. From the perspective of institutional path
dependency, the historical circumstances upon which political
Southeast Asia Tour
Unit Asia performs with Tots Tolentino (3rd from R) at
institutions were introduced in these countries impact on Merk’s Bar, Greenbelt 3 on Oct. 25 (above); and with
the institutional choices available to current political actors. Sitti at Music Museum on Oct. 28, 2008 (below).
Thus, constitutions are not only “parchment institutions” that
structure politics through rules, procedures, and constraints;
but also serve as arenas for political struggles and are often
shaped by these struggles.
Constitutions can contribute to political order by
coordinating expectations of political actors and help to
identify focal strategies to address political conflicts. The
Japanese Constitution has functioned through time as a
self-enforcing constitution while the Philippines has suffered
from a series of constitutional crises. Despite the continuing
challenges to the pacifist norm of the Japanese Constitution,
the stakes of politics has been effectively lowered. In the
Philippines, the institutionalization of presidential continuismo
or attempts by incumbent presidents to extend their term
through extra-constitutional means continue to raise the
stake of politics.

Dr. Julio C. Teehankee is the Chair of the International Studies Department at De
La Salle University. Previously, he served as Chair of the Political Science Department
for four terms between 1994 and 2007. From September 2007 to June 2008, he was a
Japan Foundation Fellow at the Graduate School of Law and Politics, the University
of Tokyo, Japan. He holds a PhD in Development Studies from De la Salle University
and an MA in Political Science from the University of the Philippines. He specializes in
the comparative analysis of politics and development in East and Southeast Asia, and
has published several papers on Japan that discussed issues on legislative recruitment,
elections, party system, local politics, and domestic sources of Japanese foreign policy.
Issues and Concerns on
Philippine Nikkeijin
Dr. Shun Ohno, Professor, Kyushu University delivering his lecture
on “Shifting Identities of Philippine Nikkeijin” as Keynote Speaker
during the Seminar on Issues and Concerns on Philippine Nikkeijin on
February 6, 2009 at AVR-2, Capitol University, Cagayan de Oro City

>> CONTINUED NEXT PAGE