PUBLICATIONS occasional

PAPER
MARCH 2018
ISSUE 11.3

POSITIONING
CIVIL
SOCIETY
 OCCASIONAL PAPER MARCH 2018

02
POSITIONING
CIVIL
SOCIETY HOW CAN CIVIL SOCIETIES SITUATE THEMSELVES UNDER THE DUTERTE GOVERNMENT?

The positioning of civil society is dependent on three core principles—association, educational and mobilization. These
positional principles promote the competitive nature of civil society vis-à-vis powerful social forces. On the other
hand, the same principles insinuate the internal necessity for civil society actors to continually co-exist in
a diversified environment. By promoting a positional civil society, only then can its potentials be
welcomed and realized in an environment dominated by powerful social forces and relations.

Every socio-historical and political juncture represents a set of
conditions which social actors like the state, market, and civil society
could take advantage of. Thus far, what we have witnessed throughout
the colonial and post-colonial periods were superficial political changes
devoid of any transformative economic and socio-cultural impacts on
the general population. This is the very reason why the emergence and
ascendance into power of any “centrist”, “pro-poor” or “populist” leader
or politician always holds sway in the opinion of the Filipinos.
The ascendancy of a president that brandishes the promise of radical
change proffers both risks and opportunities in the enlargement and
deepening of political space. While such leadership would always tend
to break away from traditional practices, the social relations that
govern politics are more or less unchanging. This is because the
economic basis of society has not improved or progressed.
The aforesaid conditions that shape state relations and social relations
are the prime considerations for the promotion of the political space.
This paper is structured as follows. The first part broadly explains
Philippine political history to give prime consideration to civil society. It
then provides an exposition for civil society as the theoretical plane or
political space. The third section provides a brief description of what
is currently happening to civil society. The fourth section in effect is an
analysis of the expansion and/or constriction of the space under the
current presidency. Finally, the last part posits the challenges
that civil society should internally and externally confront.

Image Credit: dailymail.co.uk

* The views and opinions expressed in this Paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Institute.

C 2018 STRATBASE ADR INSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved. www.adrinstitute.org
OCCASIONAL PAPER MARCH 2018
03
Historical Brief
What makes it particularly interesting to study the politics or
social setting of any country is the degree through which
organized sections can act, influence, and even
challenge the actions of more powerful social forces.
The Philippine landscape, hitherto, is a breeding ground of
people’s involvement in the various affairs of government and
economy. In its early social history, the masses have been active in
negotiating and even challenging the actions and social conditions
imposed by the Spanish colonizers. This tradition reverberated
throughout the Japanese, American, and independence periods.
Two broad processes and implications of political economy can be
pinpointed as factors – the expansion of capitalism that penetrated
through the moral economy of the people and the wave of
nationalism that has periodically rippled through the non-colonial
actions. More or less, this has been the countervailing cycle
compounded by the ensuing social relations and state processes,
which have engulfed Philippine society for the past centuries.
One of the most defining contemporary moments in terms of
public engagement was the construction of a dictatorial society,
where the country, for more than two decades, subsisted under
the auspices of authoritarianism, and, for almost a decade,
was subjected to military rule. By and large, political space
was constricted and public involvement was imprisoned.
C 2018 STRATBASE ADR INSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.
During the early stage of Martial Law, however, two significant
actions have sparked the idea that public protest is still doable and
exercisable. In 1974, the Zone One Tondo Organization staged
a procession rally on the issue of urban housing, and in 1975,
the workers launched a strike at La Tondeña Distillery, Inc. These
actions of enlarging the political space were succeeded by
many other forms of public actions directed at addressing the
political and economic conditions of an authoritarian society.
As a result, the numerous protest actions culminated in the much-
revered EDSA Uprising of 1986 that resulted in the deposal of the
Marcos dictatorship and the euphoric celebration of the opening of
democratic space. Social and political activists from the broad
left and liberal standpoints joined the Aquino government and
tried to change the system from within. Other activists and
organizations, however, continued their plight independently.
Another political trend that has been overlooked or which has
not been sufficiently analyzed was the underlying process of
demobilization, which started in 1983.1 While the mass protests
became more widespread and intense after the assassination of
Ninoy Aquino, the masses have become demobilized as the
protest issues have been pinned into the themes of justice and
human rights. The more important issues like poverty and political
and economic democracy have unwittingly been put at the sides.
The space where these protests were held was also revealing.
Much of the bigger and louder protests were staged along
Ayala Avenue and in Ugarte Field, which, by nature, reflects
middle-class and even upper middle-class inclinations.
Nonetheless, the then-renowned cause-oriented groups who were
at the forefront in fighting for democratic space and economic
issues have been overshadowed by the mushrooming of non-
governmental organizations (NGOs). The people’s organizations
(POs) also became the more popular term for grassroots
organizations that are based in the localities. With less
theoretical evaluation and through a leap of faith, the NGOs
and POs were heralded as what is now called civil society.
During the early stages of the Cory Aquino administration, the
demobilization current swept through the programs and actions
of civil society organizations to the present. While there are
much bigger NGOs, coalitions, and networks that propagate
sectoral and multi-sectoral issues today, civil society is still
effectively depoliticized, demobilized, and fragmentized.
It is in this context where this paper puts emphasis on
positioning civil society and providing due consideration
to political economy and social relations.
In another context, the grandiose design of democratization
and globalization would have been more likely appreciated and
felt were it not for the widening and deepening of democratic
deficit. This is the condition where people are becoming more
estranged from their governments. Further, democratic space is
not simply enlarged, but is rather felt and seen through effective
public engagement. For globalization, the overriding issue is
how to democratize it in terms of making more people and
economies enjoy its benefits and curb its disastrous impact on
the communities. These larger contexts likewise posit bigger
challenges to civil society at different spatial landscapes.
www.adrinstitute.org
OCCASIONAL PAPER MARCH 2018
04
Furthermore, Philippine civil society at present faces a far more
complicated task under the current administration. Posed as
a dauntless leader, President Duterte’s populist stand and the
federalist perspective under the threatening establishment of a
“revolutionary government” backed up by the “majority block” create
a more complex landscape for engagement. A significant degree of
political analysis is indeed needed to fathom such political dynamic.
An Exposition for Civil Society
During colonialism, after independence, during Martial Law, and
after the EDSA Uprising, social reproduction has been the overriding
trend rather than social transformation.2 While the political rigodon
has currently involved women and few lower-class individuals,
the electoral process is still limited to wealthy families.
The political space for public involvement is still dependent on
the more powerful forces and social relations that dictate
Philippine politics. To be more equipped and capable,
civil society must be positioned as the space for
associational, educational and mobilizational goals.
Civil society is the theoretical plane, while social movements,
NGOs, POs and grassroots organizations, and a whole gamut
of social practices are the empirical manifestations as to what
is happening on the ground.3 For Ahrne, civil society actors
are basically comprised of voluntary organizations, movements,
and networks.4 In essence, these collectivities represent the
organizational forms through which civil society exercises its
politics. The concept is just like the state, with its government,
people, sovereignty and territory; and the market, with its business
organizations, infrastructure, and commercial transactions.
C 2018 STRATBASE ADR INSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.
Among the family, the state, and other powerful social forces, a
space exists where social relations are forged. This is characterized
by interests ranging from individualist to collective orientations. Civil
society is the space to represent the associational life created by
an ensemble of politically-empowered and conscious actors
between the family and the state.5 Politically-empowered and
conscious actors refer to those organizations and entities that
have the capacity to advance and fight for the interests of their
members and to a significant extent, the general population. In
their political dealings, these organizations come face-to-face
with the state and other dominant structures (e.g., businesses)
and processes in society and the ensuing relationships
range from being oppositional to collaborative.
The need for a strong civil society is underlined by several claims
and assumptions. It is, for instance, implied by the assumption that
this kind of political force is instrumental to a society undergoing
a transition from authoritarian rule to democracy.6 It is further
perceived that this space is a political refuge7, a guardian or
protector of the people against the abusive tendencies of the state
and prods the same for accountability and transparency8; and
is the “proper terrain for the evolution and development of
democratic processes, institutions, and political cultures.”9
On one hand, a strong civil society is assumed to be present where
NGOs and POs help in the delivery of social services.10 Under
a similar perspective, it is also viewed that the sphere could be
strengthened through the existence of effective and accountable
state structures.11 On the other hand, another critical insight that
logically insinuates the potentials of civil society as a counterbalance
vis-à-vis state abuse and market rapacity is to perceive it as the
www.adrinstitute.org
OCCASIONAL PAPER MARCH 2018

05
“political space that affords the most substantive oppositional
capacity and potential, within which social forces can both resist
and co-operate with the state in their own interests.”12 On this
note, the sphere could hence be “nurtured in resistance, struggles,
and confrontation.”13 A caveat, however, to such assumptions
or assertions points to the situation that civil society is not
a homogeneous sphere and, thereby, not conflict-free.14

By way of collaboration or opposition, I associate the presence

of a strong civil society, where actors or organizations through
their political practices are able to assume the associational,
pedagogic and mobilizational role in relation to their constituents
or the general population. Initially, participants get educated
through their struggles and from planned pedagogical methods of
organizations. Similar to what Chandoke (1995) posits, civil society
has a pedagogic nature as it exists to educate people through the
strength of collective action. Hence, the educational character of
civil society depends on its capability to create or form a specific
type of consciousness.15 It is likewise an environment where an
individual learns sociability, social solidarity, the importance of
group action, and how his welfare relies on other people.16

One way to achieve political mobilization is through socialization.

Actors imbibe a level of collective self-confidence through
sociability and social action. Then, groups combine individual
interests into a bigger collective motivation and subsequently
convert individual endeavors into collective action. Consequently,
considerable levels of unity could be achieved by directly
cooperating and/or challenging structures and processes.

Image Credit:michaelkonik.com/standing-together-singing/protesters/

C 2018 STRATBASE ADR INSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved. www.adrinstitute.org
OCCASIONAL PAPER MARCH 2018
06
Political Space and Its Environment
Elsewhere, political space has been constantly contoured by
regime changes and transitions, and the emergence of and
re-emergence of new and old forces. Another telling factor points
to the impact of overarching economic processes that
circumference social relation and governments.
While the mid-1980s and 1990s could be termed as the
“democratization” stage, the overlapping economic process was
liberalization and globalization. Another political process that
simultaneously mixed up with these was the pendulum of
regime changes sweeping across the north and south. This
is demonstrated by the emergence/re-emergence and
positioning/de-positioning of populist, Marxist, fascist,
liberal, and hybrid governments and leaders.
The point of contention, however, is the degree by which the political
space has improved or worsened amidst the claimed developments.
From a human rights perspective, the current period could be
termed as democratic recession (Mooney & Green, 2018).
“In Romania, democracy is facing its “gravest danger”; Venezuela
has banned opposition in the name of democracy; and India’s
supreme court judges have warned that democracy is under
threat. Indeed, over the past few years, the world has suffered a
democratic recession. Public opinion polls measuring citizens’ faith
in government institutions have recorded historic lows in the United
States, for example; and an abundance of academic and policy
research points to a resurgence of illiberal democracy and resilient
authoritarianism. According to the Economist Intelligence Unit, 72
countries experienced a deterioration in democracy in 2016, while
Freedom House recorded 11 consecutive years of decline in global
democracy.”17
C 2018 STRATBASE ADR INSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.
Further, a “well-informed and invested public” is the first line of defense
against such democratic erosion. While citizen engagement is also
historic as indicated by the declining voter turnout since the 1990s,
“resilience in the form of strong citizen engagement and sound
institutions” is also critical to address the decline.18
In the same perspective but with a particular development orientation,
Vandyck (2018) puts forward the advantages of opening the
political space through civil society and government
partnership in light of the African experience.
“It is evident that African countries need stronger institutions; greater
engagement by citizens in the democratic process; more human
and infrastructure investment; an increase in capital inflows; and a
collective effort by state and nonstate actors to consistently advance
inclusive governance. The importance of inclusive governance has
placed a tremendous responsibility on civil society and governments
to work in partnership toward sustainable prosperity. This has
become even more crucial as civil society faces increased attacks on
its operations and spaces for engagement, undermining democracy
and development.”19
The cooperation with the government, according to the author, should
be explored to expand civic freedoms,exercise independence and
flexibility of civil society, and for activists and policy makers to
meet at the policy level and achieve complementarity.
It must be mentioned that the immediate environment which civil society
actors have to contend with is government. Governance or the process
through which a state implements its leadership and policies by means
of a government is a public relations process. In this process,
public involvement is a permanent component wherein civil society
actors can engage to influence, or even direct. In this set-up,
the expansion and deepening of the political space
becomes utterly important for civil society actors.
www.adrinstitute.org
OCCASIONAL PAPER MARCH 2018
07
Philippine Political Space
With striking similarities and differences, the Philippine case is
peculiar. The public’s popular acceptance of the current presidency
speaks of a particular terrain of engagement. With his “delighting”
nationalist stance and dauntless conviction on key issues and
events, President Duterte could suddenly “irritate” the national or
international audience with whimsical remarks that are quite un-
statesmanlike and bereft of political astuteness. But in an instant,
his populist appeals could simply soothe the mood of the crowd.
Hence, the question: What are the prospects for civil society
expansion and constriction under the Duterte presidency?
The leadership of Duterte, under the banner of Dutertenomics,
law and order, and federalism, has lifted the hopes of many
Filipinos about the promise of radical change. In the context of
civil society expansion, nonstate actors could incessantly press
for the fulfillment of specific promises and in the process could
likewise strengthen civic engagement. The condition
will also impact upon the breadth of space where
individuals and collectives could bargain for reforms.
Another indispensable task of actors is the continuous monitoring
and provision of feedback regarding the significant legislative
measures that have been passed. The Freedom of Information Act
C 2018 STRATBASE ADR INSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.
is a critical issue where government could be put under constant
pressure to perform in the name of transparency and accountability.
The implementation of free education should likewise be a
critical link in the creation of a well-informed citizenry.
Another interesting development is the character of budget
allocations for the past two years. The pro-poor orientation
of budgeting should be a permanent issue for lobbying
and propagation of civil society actors. This situation is one of
the significant breaks that the current administration is able to
provide for the people. Serious monitoring and research should be
carried out to ascertain its implementation and continuation.
Environmental protection and preservation is another very potent
issue for interaction. Having a president that is well informed about
the impact of environmental degradation nationwide, political
ecology, and even green ideology is a fine subject for joint actions
and project undertakings. It is just a matter of realigning the
tactical agenda of environmental organizations and move
toward saving the environment one step at a time.
Further, the openness of the administration, specifically President
Duterte, in accommodating dialogues and meetings should be
maximized to secure an audience and ventilate the issues and
concerns of specific sectors. Approved or disapproved, welcomed
or set aside, to be given the chance to directly communicate
with the leader of the country is already a positive
indicator for civil society actors.
While the prospects for expansion are encouraging, the
projection for constriction of civil society is equally the same.
The pronouncements about a “revolutionary government”, of
being a “dictator” in the interest of the people and “threats” to
opposition are dangerous remarks that could effectively put
civil society on its heels. Nonetheless, the shallow populist
stance could be made to deliver public services by simply
demanding from the administration the promises made
during the electoral campaign, upon assumption to power
and in the two past addresses to the nation.
Finally, what could be the options for oppositional politics? Protest
actions are part and parcel of political dynamics and pressure
politics is a natural recourse for organizations representing the
interest of their constituents. More importantly, protest is heavily
carved throughout the pages of Philippine history. The fine point,
however, is to mix old and new tactics attuned to the current
political situation. In terms of strategy, expansion is not the
primary concern of protest organizations, but rather, a thorough
consolidation of what has remained since the EDSA Uprising.
www.adrinstitute.org
OCCASIONAL PAPER MARCH 2018

08
Challenges

Civil society actors should confront multi-level tasks or challenges. First, they are eternally challenged to imbibe and accomplish the
associational, educational, and mobilizational goals. Only by assuming these goals can the political space be created, expanded, and
improved. Individuals cannot simply join organizations or collectivities if they do not see and feel any form of association within them.
Association in turn, is elevated with a significant degree of education to keep them informed and organized—but association and
education would never be enough to apply ideas into action. Through mobilization, individuals and groups learn
the values of collective action to practically do something about their problems and concerns.

Another eternal challenge is the dynamic relationship among civil society actors. As diverse as they can be, differing in ideological, political,
and economic standpoints, this ensemble of politically-empowered actors is never homogenous. Heterogeneity is the rule and co-existence
is the protocol. The challenge, perhaps, pertains to the painstaking effort of being able to act together on a certain issue, program or
framework. A conflictual society is never pathological; neither is the existence of a conflictual state and social relations.

Flexibility is another tedious and colossal task. Adopting the particular skill set to lobby and to fight for particular and general interests
is equally significant with understanding the changing and/or unchanging character of the government and social relations. This is the
standing order for civil society actors under the present administration, which equally demonstrates volatile political behavior.

Furthermore, civil society actors should be able to provide a lucid analysis of state processes under the Duterte administration. The
dynamics of having a “majority block” in government is both a relief and an impediment should its interests converge or diverge with
various organizations. In effect, actors would be able to anticipate and predict government actions and programs and attune
their agenda for the next four years. Alongside this, they should also be keen with the political culture
that the Duterte phenomenon has brought about and the effect of such to social relations.

In sum, the challenges enumerated above beg this central question: Given a popular nationalistic president with a
volatile political behavior, how should civil society activists position themselves?

While outright opposition could at times be the tactic, strategic collaboration based on critical engagement should be the major theme
of interaction. The “pro-people” actions and policies of the current administration should be maximized and promoted,
entailing a grounded knowledge of the formulation and implementation of these programs. Isolation is never an
option—such condition could further demobilize, fragmentize and depoliticize the political space.

Lest we forget, the political space is something that is fought for.

C 2018 STRATBASE ADR INSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved. www.adrinstitute.org
 OCCASIONAL PAPER MARCH 2018

09
REFERENCES

1
See Boudreau, Vincent G. 1996. “Of Motorcades and Masses: Mobilization and Innovation in 14
Chandhoke 1995; David 1998; and McIlwaine, C. 1998. “Contesting civil society: reflections
Philippine Protest”, pp. 60-81, in The Revolution Falters: The Left in Philippine Politics After 1986, edited from El Salvador”. Third World Quarterly, 19: (4) 651-672. Abington: Carfax Publ. Co.
by Patricio N. Abinales. New York: Southeast Asia Program, Cornell University.
15
Chandhoke, 1995
2
Social reproduction and social transformation are the classic terms from Giddens, Anthony.
1984. The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley, University of California 16
Pelczynski, Z. (1988) ‘Solidarity and the ‘Rebirth of Civil Society’ in Poland, 1976-81’ in Civil
Press. Society and the State: New European Perspectives, edited by John Keane. London: Verso.
3
Chandhoke, Neera. 1995. State and Civil Society: Explorations on Political Theory. Sage Pub- 17
Mooney, Lauren and Shannon N. Green. 2018. “Time to Renew the Democracy Playbook”.
lications: New Delhi. Center for Strategic and International Studies, https://www.csis.org/analysis/time-renew-democracy-
playbook
4
Ahrne, Goran. 1998. “Civil society and Uncivil Organizations”, pp. 84-95, in Real Civil Societ-
ies: Dilemmas of Institutionalization, edited by Jeffrey Alexander. London: Sage Publications Ltd. 18
Mooney & Green, 2018.
5
This perception of civil society could be traced from Sztompka’s (1998) sociological and cul- 19
Vandyck, Charles Kojo. 2018. “Opening Up Civic Space through Effective Civil Society and
tural concept and that of Pérez-Díaz’s (1998) minimalist or socio-cultural minimalist categories. Sztomp- Government Cooperation”. Center for Strategic and International Studies, https://www.csis.org/blogs/
ka, Piotr. 1998. “Mistrusting Civility: A Predicament of a Post-Communist Society”, pp. 191-210, in Real international-consortium-closing-civic-space/opening-civic-space-through-effective-civil
Civil Societies: Dilemmas of Institutionalization, edited by Jeffrey Alexander. London: Sage Publications
Ltd and Pérez-Díaz, Victor. 1998. “The Public Sphere and a European Civil Society” in Real Civil Societ-
ies: Dilemmas of Institutionalization, edited by Jeffrey Alexander. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
6
Sklar, Richard. 1996. “Towards a Theory of Developmental Democracy”, pp. 25-44, in De-
mocracy and Development, edited by Adrian Leftwich. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press; Chandhoke 1995;
and Janoski, Thomas. 1998. Citizenship and Civil Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7
Colas, Dominique. 1997. Civil society and fanaticism: conjoined histories (translated from
French by Amy Jacobs). Stanford, Calif.: Standford University Press.
8
Ferrer, Miriam Coronel. 1997. Philippine democracy agenda: Civil society making civil society
(Vol. III). Diliman, Quezon City: Third World Studies Center; David, Karina. 1998. From the Present Look-
ing Back: A History of People’s NGOs, pp. 26-48, in Organizing for Democracy: NGOs, Civil Society,
and the Philippine State, edited by Sidney G. Silliman and Lela Garner Noble Silliman and Noble. USA:
University of Hawai’i Press.
9
Diokno, Serena I (editor). 1997. Philippine democracy agenda: Democracy and citizenship in
Filipino political culture (Vol. I). Diliman, Quezon City: Third World Studies Center.
10
Francisco, Oscar D. 1994. “The Politics of Civil Society”, Discussion Papers, Issue No. 1, pp.
1-21, Information and Policy Support Unity. Quezon City, Philippines: PEACE Foundation Inc.
11
Roniger, Luis. 1998. “Civil Society, Patronage and Democracy”, pp. 66-83, in Real Civil Societ-
ies: Dilemmas of Institutionalization, edited by Jeffrey Alexander. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
12
Rodan, Garry (editor). 1996. Political Oppositions in Industrialising Asia. London: Routledge.
13
Ferrer, 1997

C 2018 STRATBASE ADR INSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved. www.adrinstitute.org
11.3
VOLUME

ABOUT
Dr. Jaime M. Jimenez
is a Senior Policy Research Analyst of the Stratbase ADR Institute.
He received his Bachelor’s degree in Political Science at De La
Salle University in 1994, graduating with a Gold Medal for Academic
Excellence. In 1998, he received his MA in Philippine Studies at De La
Salle University, and earned his Doctorate degree in Southeast Asia
Studies at the National University of Singapore in 2003.

Stratbase ADR Institute

is an independent international and strategic research
organization with the principal goal of addressing the
issues affecting the Philippines and East Asia
9F 6780 Ayala Avenue, Makati City
Philippines 1200
V 8921751
F 8921754
www.stratbase.ph

C 2018 STRATBASE ADRiNSTITUTE for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved. Image Credit: adb.org