vonjobi: wow, congratulations! kelan ang trip? i hope i'll be around when you come. had a good time with diosa last...
Keith Bacongco: Knowing Nograles and his Big Boss...garapalan na lang talaga.
Vinia Datinguinoo Mukherjee: Congratulations, PCIJ! Mabuhay kayo!
Lead Philippines: But without credible mass media there, what is left to protect the people..?
vonjobi: it's juned sOniDo.

Latest Message 5 months ago

hopeless_race : Lets not just focus sa mga malversation of funds, sa mga overpricing..ating pagtuunan ng atensyon ang diskarte ng mga politiko na umuutang ng bilyon bilyon sa gobyerno."Small time" ang ibang pamamaraan ng pangungurakot kumpara sa pag-utang sa gobyerno ng bilyon na tunay ngang masasabing "pinaka big-time" at wala pang sabit.
hopeless_race : Mukhang tikom ang bibig ng lahat pagdating sa diskarte ng mga politiko sa pagutang ng mga bilyon bilyon sa gobyerno na tinatakbuhan. Itong pamamaraan na ito ang tunay na kumakain ng malaking porsyento ng ating national budget batay na din sa sinasabi ng world bank.
hopeless_race : Pakisilip naman po ang mga utang ni Villar sa BSP, ang mga utang nila RAMON JACINTO, RONNIE ZAMORA, JOE DE VENECIA at madami pang ibang mga pulitiko. Iilan lamang yan sa mga nababanggit sa balita na may mga malalaking utang sa gobyerno.
hopeless_race : Nagmimistulang "small time" lamang ang malversation of funds kumpara sa laki ng kinakamal ng mga umuutang sa gobyerno. At ito ay malinaw na natatakbuhan dahil hindi nga naman pwede makulong ang may-ari ng kumpanya sa pagkaka-utang lamang. Tunay na mga tuso at magagaling sa batas itong mga politiko natin. Masasabi ko na malamang lahat ng mga politiko ganito ang diskarte...wala pang kulong.
hopeless_race : PCIJ pkitingnan naman po ang mga gaya ni Villar na my malaking utang sa Gobyerno pero tinatakbuhan. Magtatayo ng kumpanya at uutang ng bilyon bilyon sa gobyerno ng walang balak bayaran. Tunay ngang walang nakukulong sa utang...ito ang prinsipyo ginagamit ng mga politiko ntin kaya nakakapagtaka kung san napupunta ang daang bilyong pera ng gobyerno.
hopeless_race : Sana itreat naman po ng media ang hacienda luisita at mendiola massacre na parang MAGUINADANAO MASSACRE. Ipublicized ang mga katotohanan at ipakita sa tao ang karumaldumal na pinaggagawa sa mga farmers dun. Untouchable po ba sila cory at danding at hindi magawang batikusin ng media about these two massacres?
hopeless_race : Kapag napaguusapan ang mendiola at hacienda luisita massacre ay parang walang nangyari at parang hindi big deal. Anu po ba ang pinagkaiba ng dalawang nabanggit na massacre sa maguindanao massacre?
hopeless_race : Its sad that we pinoys are blind to the fact of what had happened in mendiola and hacienda luisita. Ang tanong..bakit ang media ay hindi manlang matackle ang ganitong usapin? Takot ba sila kay cory at danding?
hopeless_race : Wilkins" brand, for P1.4 billion.-1999 Sugarland Multi-Food Corp. for P2.9 billion 2001- Purefoods Corp P7 billion P60 billion Coca-Cola ... See More 2002- Cosmos Bottling Corp. from RFM Corp. for P14.1 billion October 2008- GSIS' shares in Meralco worth PHP30 Billion. December 2008- country's biggest oil refiner, Petron Corporation. international company shopping spree: Australian boutique brewer J. Boag and Son for A$96 million in 2000. $97 million for Thai Amarit Brewery Ltd $35.5 mi
hopeless_race : Gud am..glad to be back.
jr_lad : rip mr. alecks pabico. you'll be greatly missed!
sevens21 : Dati input mo lng name at SSS ID makukuha mo agad STATIC INFO...
sevens21 : tawag ka sa HOTLINE nila walang ANSWER grrr we need pa namn ng static info SSS Gising!!!
sevens21 : Gawa naman po kayo ng article about SSS. Pangit ng site nila dali ma blocked ng account
guest_899 : we must check the background of each potential candidates to avoid having another big mistake like GMA
guest_899 : congratulations to PCIJ, more power and God Bless !
jazzymuver : how did Arroyo swallow that kind of things!! how come that she just spend the money our countrymen for her own sake!!
guest_3664 : i would be glad if u can include the investigation of the manner public officials announce infra projects as per COA regulation. It is frustrating to see their faces on the tarpaulin instead of the prescribed information like name of project, date of implementation,amount of contract, source/s of fund, among other things. This is very rampant here in Marikina. Thanks and more power on your noble endeavors. We need people like you to have make our country great again.
jhanz_08 : im making research on R.A 9136...with rgards to the privatization of NPC..could someone out there can let me understand more bout this matter?why was monopoly dismantled?email me..jhanycem@yahoo.com...thanks much
erika marie : P.S.:) my paper is due next week and i do hope someone could provide me these reports coming from reliable resources thank you ulit.
erika marie : P.S.
guest_4275 : i am currently doing a study regarding political killings in the philippines. could someone out there please send me human rights reports under Aquino and Ramos administration. you could send it at my email: erikamariet@yahoo.com your response would surely be very much appreciated. thank you everyone. god bless.
guest_4275 : i am currently doing a study for my paper regarding political killings in the philippines. i noted that there are no human rights reports during the Aquino and Ramos administration. could someone out there please send me reports regarding these matter? i do hope these reports came from reliable resources you could send it in my email; erikamariet@yahoo.comyour response would surely be appreciated. thanks everyone. god bless.
jayson bourne : gusto ko po maging member ng PCIJ, panu po ba? may application po ba? sana mapadalhan nyo ako ng info sa email ko... www.jboxpenshoppe@yahoo.com
jayson bourne : cory is OK, but kris & Noynoy sensationalize masyado...
guest_9891 : LABAN pa rin!
meow : boycotts worked during marcos years. how about doing it now against the businesses of the con-ass congressmen?
meow : aside from 168, what other establishments can we boycott that belong to the arroyos and their cronies?
Jalenack : Your shoutbox is blank. Add a message!

You must be a registered user to participate in this chat

Are we ready for a parliamentary system?

Posted by: Alecks P. Pabico | July 29, 2005 at 5:58 pm
Filed under: Governance, In the News

IN her State of the Nation Address (SONA) last Monday, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo reiterated what she had already said in previous pronouncements about how “our political system has degenerated” to become “a hindrance to progress” and how “we have strained it to its final limits” — premises for her calling on Congress to initiate moves to amend the Constitution and effect a change to the parliamentary form of government.

Arroyo did not stop at that and even prescribed the manner by which charter change is to be done — via Congress itself sitting as a constituent assembly, to the obvious delight of its prime proponent, Speaker Jose de Venecia.

Such a proposal for a shift to a parliamentary form, especially if one considers the timeframe set by former president Fidel Ramos, seems to overlook the fact that we don’t have strong, mature political parties, which are the lifeblood of a parliamentary setup. While people do not need convincing about this sad fact, findings of the international Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening (CEPPS) mission that monitored the 2004 elections are worth a second look:

Political parties remain weak institutions. While they have been in existence for more than half a century, they have never been more powerful than patronage systems.
There is little incentive for politicians to cede his or her individual power to a political party.
Political parties barely exist outside elections.

Evident in the character of the 2004 political campaigns and elections was this absence of a definable national political party system which, the International Republican Institute (IRI), a member of the CEPPS mission, said, “focused almost exclusively on personality and, particularly at the local level, one or another form of promised patronage.”

No clearly was this manifested than in the candidacy of Fernando Poe Jr., who was not a member of any of the parties in the Koalisyon ng Nagkakaisang Pilipino (KNP) coalition. But Pres. Arroyo was no different either as she ran under the banner of three different parties — Lakas, Liberal Party and her own Kampi, whose membership is said to shrink and expand at the slightest hint of an impending election season.

The IRI also noted the “generally poor quality of political debate during the campaign, and its lack of relevance to the most pressing social and economic problems of the nation.”

What is undermining the country’s capacity for sustained development within the context of liberal democracy, the IRI pointed out, is its failure to make significant progress to consolidate its party system.

It is highly likely therefore that no discernible improvements can be gained whether under the present presidential system or the proposed federal, parliamentary framework without a tectonic shift in our party system. It would similarly be naïve to expect our present crop of politicians and political parties to change overnight with a change in the form of government.

To give the present Congress, the House of Representatives under the leadership of Speaker de Venecia in particular, the authority to sit as a constituent assembly to tackle amendments to the Constitution is also bereft of any wisdom.

This is the same institution that has since its reconstitution in 1987 consistently sat on vital political and electoral reforms that could have at the very least arrested the degeneration of the present system that Pres. Arroyo now rues about and conveniently seeks to replace.

A reform-minded legislature should have long passed the anti-dynasty bill, which was introduced as early as the term of the 8th Congress to fully enable the Constitutional provision that bans “political dynasties” — monopolies of political power by a limited number of families. Such a law has failed to be enacted since many of the members of Congress, from the 8th to the current 13th, come from long lines of political families who refuse to legislate themselves out of public office.

Still pending in the legislature is what political and electoral reform advocates consider as the most essential piece of legislation, the Political Party Reform Act, which was introduced in 2003 in the 12th Congress. The law seeks to provide the needed impetus for the development of parties based on platforms and programs, rather than on individuals and infleunce. Among its salient provisions are:

regulating the conduct of political parties, including the selection of leaders by party congress;
minimum funding by the state to duly registered national parties;
regulating campaign financing and spending, including restricting individual campaign contributions;
banning “turncoatism” — the rampant practice of switching political affiliation that weakens party structures, confuses voters, and undermines the concept of a viable opposition (In fact, an anti-turncoatism bill was first filed in the 8th Congress.)

For a bill certified as urgent by the Legislative Executive Development Advisory Council (LEDAC), only one hearing has so far been conducted by the Senate committee chaired by Sen. Richard Gordon, while it still has to be calendared by the House committee chaired by Rep. Teodoro Locsin Jr.

Though another important law, the Party List System Act, was passed in 1995, it was a compromised piece of legislation. No less than the Supreme Court pointed out its basic flaws: the prohibitive existing threshold of two percent leaving congressional seats vacant, and its lack of any clearly defined eligibility criteria.

Since being introduced last August, amendments to the law, which include clarifying eligibility requirements, lowering the threshold to 1.8 percent, and increasing the maximum number of seats per party from three to six, have only reached the committee level this May.

For Arroyo to ask Congress to preside over constitutional amendments now betrays a lack of seriousness in pursuing genuine reforms.

This entry was posted on Friday, July 29th, 2005 and is filed under Governance, In the News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

14 people have left comments

It is very clear that Pres Arroyo is just using the change to parliamentary government as a means to escape culpability from the “Hello Garci” and Jueteng Gate scandals.

If Pres Arroyo is really sincere in clearing her name, she should advise her partymates to speed up the impeachment process in Congress

rcherrera wrote on July 29, 2005 - 6:28 pm | Visit Link

PU%&*+ I!|, MAGPAKATOTOO NATAYO, HINDI MA I-IMPEACH C PANDAK, PARE-PAREHO SILANG MAKAKAPAL ANG MUKHA AT KAPIT TUKO SA PWESTO…MAGTRABAHO NALANG TAYONG LAHAT, HINDI TAYO PAKAKAININ NG MGA LINTIK NA BWITRE NAYAN…LET’S ALL GROW-UP!!! SAWANG-SAWA NAKO!!!!

DIMITRI wrote on July 29, 2005 - 7:16 pm | Visit Link

Hehe.. relax lang

noelet wrote on July 29, 2005 - 9:29 pm | Visit Link

excellent points against Cha-Cha at this point. first is the need to address the prerequisite reforms necessary to ensure that amendments in the constitution will not only result in the same set of trapos and elites lording it over whatever form of government we will have afterwards.

peregrine0925 wrote on July 30, 2005 - 5:28 pm | Visit Link

[...] The SWS polled 1,200 respondents from May 14-23, long before President Arroyo’s July 25 State of the Nation Address in which she stated her preference for a parliamentary system. [...]

INSIDE PCIJ: Stories behind our stories » No need for charter change wrote on August 3, 2005 - 11:44 am | Visit Link

CHARTER change? The charter is not the problem!!!! The LEADER is the problem and therefore the LEADER should be changed!…Do not blame the CHARTER for the failure of the leaders….The LEADERS should be blamed and be kicked out!….for a change!…

tonyvn wrote on August 3, 2005 - 1:43 pm | Visit Link

A parliamentary systems cook by GMA, JdV, FVR and their cohorts will only worsen our situation.

Sabi pa ni JdV, sa parliamentary daw madaling mag-pass ng batas upang mag tayo ng “hospitals, schools, roads”?! Tumaas ang dugo ko!

Walang batas na nagbabawal sa pangulo, na magpapatayo ng maraming shools, hospitals at roads. Budget ang kailangan, kung WALA tayong budget dahil sa madalang na koleksyon ng buwis then ang problema ay wala sa kung anong sestimang pang gobyerno na mayroon tayo. Nasa sagot sa budget ay isang programa : masinop na pagpatupad ng kolekyon ng buwis. On the other side, maraming filipino ang tumatakas sa pagbabayad ng buwis, dahil di naman nakikita na ginamit sa tamang kinaukulan ang ito!

Why change to Parliamentary? Kapit tuko na lamang….what a shame!
With a kind of leader we have with JdV…pera lamang ang katapat ng mga politiko natin…ayus na….PM na siya!

We don’t have a strong “political party system” na magbigkis sa bawat politiko sa kanilang paninindigan! Halos lahat, BALIMBING, at mga KAMBING!

xroads4JR wrote on August 3, 2005 - 1:57 pm | Visit Link

You mentioned FPJs candidacy coming in from the left field. Yes, for sometime before the election I thought Lacson was the presidential bet of the opposition.

But I think it was more of Angara being always the bridesgroom but never the bride - so to speak, that paved the way for FPJs nomination. Always overlooked, trying hard to be presidentiable, I think it irked Angara that a newcomer like Lacson could land the top job.

And so the Angara-Lacson feud was born.

ejam wrote on August 4, 2005 - 8:23 pm | Visit Link

I believe that it is time that we shift to a parliamentary system.

Just look at our current legislature (congress and senate), you can only have a handful of qualified people to run. Majority were voted due to popularity, it is about time that our system changes.

Just a sample, you don’t see Sen. Ramon “Bong” Revilla on tv getting involve in serious subjects involving in the senate. You see him more these days because of the problem with his kid and Rosanna Roces.

Others would be Sen. Lacson, Sen. Jinggoy Estrada and his mother, all of his privilege speeches are against the government. Did the Filipino people elect these people just to give privilege speeches against the government? To mention of course, Sen. Lacson is using all resources (take note : INCLUDING THE TAX PAYERS MONEY) just to come out with fictitious stories against the government. When these people were running for their position, what were they promising the people? Fight poverty and a lot more. ‘Til date if all that money and time that has been spent on the poor people, then by this time at least we could have lessen some of the problems of our country.

Our system should really change, we have to eliminate all of these things and as change comes, WE HAVE TO EDUCATE THE FILIPINO PEOPLE. BY EDUCATING THE FILIPINO, ELIMINATES THE EXISTENCE OF UNQUALIFIED LEADERS WHICH LEADS TO CORRUPTION IN THE GOVERNMENT.

And if the current administration is serious abou this, they should also admit and take part in sacrificing their positions for a better government.

Nash wrote on August 6, 2005 - 4:40 pm | Visit Link

Nash,
There are no unqualified leaders. A leader is a leader. A leader could rise from any rank. One could be a carpenter, an actor or a peanut farmer. Some are even goofy.

Being a president I’m sure is very difficult. But it’s not rocket science. That is why in most Constitutions/countries, the only prerequisite to be president is to be a citizen by blood and to be of good moral character.

Ideally the people will elect a leader to be president. This is democracy. Who gets the most votes win.

But then some people cheat.

And they get recorded.

And they are found out.

And they offer an excuse disguised as an apology.

And the poor people get even more poor as the economy crash and burn.

ejam wrote on August 7, 2005 - 8:31 pm | Visit Link

Nash,
I’m not against changing our system of goverment from presidential to parliament kaya lang hindi ito ang tamang oras. We are experiencing political crisis, unstable economy, people are so hopeless, poverty..etc.etc..etc.. I agree that parliamentary/federalism is better but let us concentrate first in the most critical aspect of our current and that is stabilizing our political system. We can only achieve this if the head of the state has its mandate, trust of the people and has moral to govern. Meron ba tayo nyan? WALA!

One important requirement also in changing our form government is MONEY. Meron na ngang sandamukal na UTANG ang Pilipinas, wala na ngang makain ang mga nakararami, hindi na nga maibigay ang mga pangunahing serbisyo ng gobyerno, kulang na ang mga silid-aralan ng mga estudyante, at marami pang iba. Hindi ba dapat itong mga ito ang dapat pagtuunan ng pansin at hindi ang LETSENG CHA-CHA na yan at PARLIAMENTARYO?

Hinihiling ko sayo Nash na sana ilathala mo rito ang mga gastusin sa pagpapalit ng gobyerno at hindi yung puro resulta lang ang sinasabi mo. At kapag nakuha mo na ang mga impormasyong ito saka mo timbangin kung alin ang dapat unahin, ang mga problemang nabanggit ko o yung sinasabi mong PARLIAMENTARY form of government.

Aasahan ko ang budger analysi mo partikular sa project nyong pagpapalit. YAN ANG HAMON KO SAYO.

KaBlog wrote on August 7, 2005 - 9:27 pm | Visit Link

This is the worst time to change the rules. The worst time for charter change. Some people have a lot to answer for. They have to be accountable. First and foremost.

The very same people who are saying they will help us are the people who are killing us with poverty and injustice. The very same people who are saying we should uphold the law are the ones violating them.

ejam wrote on August 10, 2005 - 8:55 pm | Visit Link

[...] Electoral reform and political reform, for starters. We keep on lamenting the kind of politics that we have, yet we fail to take our legislators to task when it comes to these matters. See this PCIJ post for what could have been. [...]

Debate on Other Things, Not About the Economy « blog @ AWBHoldings.com wrote on March 1, 2007 - 6:11 pm | Visit Link

[...] Read the 2005 State of the Nation Address of Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo >> [...]

Saving the Republic: Filipinos Say ‘NO’ to HR 1109 « Would you buy it for a quarter? wrote on June 12, 2009 - 3:16 pm | Visit Link