Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 16 Local Governments and Devolution in The Philippines PDF

    Uploaded by

    mb_estanislao
    9 views13 pages

    Original Title

    16_Local_Governments_and_Devolution_in_the_Philippines.pdf

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    9 views13 pages

    16 Local Governments and Devolution in The Philippines PDF

    Uploaded by

    mb_estanislao

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 13
    rr iii Pi al Gomer A dcon ee Local Governments and Devolution in the Philippines Maria Ela L. Atienza’ Whats happening inthe Philippines in terms of devolution through the 1991 Lacal Goverment Code is therefore not just an isolated event unique 10 the post-EDSA revolution in 4 group of ‘ands called the Philipines What is happening hee is indatve of part ofboth a leader of and @ poricipant in, a as global shift in governance. ~ Kenneth H.Ellison® BE Learning objectives ‘the ono th chapter, the stunt shoud be abl: 1. Daf decentralization, tog its deen foms, and relat wih democratization. 2 Trace ne eosin ote governments inte Phippnes and apprecits| thegyramscs ofeeiralzingand decontaliing wens bvoughout isto . pprenate end asses th major ehanges Bought sbout bythe 1881 ees! Government Code (LG) on loca governments and carreocal ‘atone 4 Dererbe the curant loca government sym. 5. Assess the impacts, chalanges, and problems brought sbout by ‘devon on Pilpinepotcs. stn te ct le ot ini ine ng nesccanetpsercaaceouseneeee arty ace tespoeca eae ctanntl mean coan —— > Fila Polis Gren: Aaedcon ss [Bd Decentralization ond Democratization A large part ofthe twentieth century was dominated by worldwide trends ‘in centralization of power and resources. Centrlization was the model fr evelopment in many parts ofthe world. But since the mk-1980s, there has been an increasing shift toward or revival of interest in decentalization, This shift can be seen not only among governments around the world but alsa in academic intrest and programs of laerational donor agencies. However, ecentatzabon means clfferent things to ifferent people and thee ate vary of motivations behind atempts to decentalize. Thus defations are in order before proceeding with the discussion. Following Rondineli and Cheema, decentralization is defined quite broadly as “the transfer of planning, decison ‘making, of administrative authority from the central government to Bed ‘organization, local governments, or nongovernmental organizations Dietent forms of decentralization can be distinguished primarily in terms of the exten. ‘of authority transfered and the amount of autonomy the decentalied ‘organizations achieve in carrying out their asks. ‘While devolution and deconcenration afe the most-known forms, thee rs actualy fo nn Fru of decenualizaton” rr, eeconcentaon voles the redistibution of administrative responsibilities only within the cental ‘government. This can be done in different ways, namely 1) the shifing of ‘Workload from a central government ministry or agency headquarters t0 ks Cwm field staf located in offices outside the national capital; 2) through fl administration that not only shits workload but also transfers some decsion- ‘making discretion to field sta, such as making routine decision and adusting {he implementation of cena directives to local condition, but within guidelines Set by the central ministry: and 3) local administration, in which all subordinate levels of government within 2 county are agents of centeal authority, usally the executive branch, {A second form is delegation to semi-atoncmous or paastatalorgarizations Decision making and management authorky for specific functions is delegated ‘to organizations that are not under the direct contol of central goverment ministries. Examples are public corporations, regional planning and afe2 development autores, mukipurpose and single purpose functional authors, and special project implementation units. Often, these organizations to which evelopment functions are delegated have sem independent authority to perform their sesponstbilies und may net even be located within the regular goverment strueture, This form of decentralization is definitely more extensive tha? administrative deconcentration, ‘A third form is devolution of functions and authori. This form seeks tO create or strengthen independent levels or units of government. Throvsh evolution, the central government relingushes cetdn functions or creates (Gaal rend esi lips as: new unis of government that are ouside ts contol. n ts purest frm, devolution ascertain fondamental characteris. Fest, local government unit (LGUs) ae hzonomous, independent, and leary perceived a separate levels of government ter which central authortes exercise litle or no direct contol. Second, the {bts have clear and legally recognized geographical boundaries within which ‘hey exes authority and perform public functions. Tied, LGUs have coxporate fats and the power to secure resources to perform their fonctions. Fourth, evolution implies “the need to “develop local governments as institutions’ —in the sense tha they are perceived by local eizens as organizations providing ‘ences that satify their neede—and as government units over which they ve some influence." Fly this san arangement in which there ae reciprocal, mutually beneficial, and coordinate relationships beeween central and local foveraments that, the LGU has the ability to interact reciprocally with other Unis inthe system of government of which & i part However, while these charicteritis of devolution may be valid fom a theoretical or even legal perspective, actual requirements in most developing counties ae less stringent. Devoltion is usually seen as a form of decentralization in which LGUs are given primary responsibility for some functions over which the cent overnment often retains some supervisory powers and in whch may play an lmportn nancial role. However, even if mos ofthe theoretical conditions for evolation are met, central governments often atempt to make LGUs act onsitenty with national development polices and plans in performing thei funcons, with cenain formal or informal contol often maiatained to accomplish ths goal Despite such limitations, for development purposes, the capacity of GUs to cary out programs and projects effecively and through reciprocal "eationsips with other organizations may be more important than “thee legal satus as independent units” Fourth, there ie the transer of functions fem government to nongovernment lnsttons, Some planning and adninisuative responsibilty or public functions te vansferred from government to voluntary, private, or nongovernment lnstutons. In some cates, government may transfer to “parallel organizations" ‘he right to license, regulate, or supervise theie members in performing functions ‘tat were previously controlled by government In other cases, government can shit responsibilty for producing goods or supplying services to private organizations, a process often called privatization. This ype of decentralization ‘maybe akin tothe concept of debureaucatztion, that i allowing decisions 'o be mide through politcal processes involving larger numbers of politcal ‘sere, rather than having the decisions made exclsively or primary by s0verament through legislation, executive decree, or administrative regulation. ven though these forme of decentralization difer la their characterises ‘nd implications, they are not mutually exchsve. In zealty, all governments, ‘¥en the highly centralized ones, have experimented with some combination Phi Ps aed Govern adn yge—,!_—eweeee—w Gap al oan an Dein iste Pip et eres frs of decent plain, decon making nd amin Sette Is Th tener in decetaleton nthe 98 ne In tant However, revs nereat looked t deceeloaion fang ‘reson pub wniieon or nanogenen sandy "hr ira rei seen oc 90th he med mt snd cic lhe sito decent worwie, wah he St patil diven® The commonly ce ass are Section eae Cticeny and ceo pom, going spy andere fo er ‘esd ret este polar precrsn a al poled peat inte cet going lal omc nd err are of com epee soepmuorsmne” However, thece is disagreement on whether ater events or processes can be considered crucial factors, e@., globalization, ethnic confit, and such The Philippines, as will be seen later, is pat of this wordwide decentltia trend ‘Whatis new since the 19605 the increased links between decentaliate and the process of democratization, another major phenomenon that gained unprecedented momentum inthe later part ofthe twentieth century. Dene county casestudies have highlighted the relationship between decenzaliztcn and democratization. Decentralization and democratization tend to elfore teach other; decentralization is a factor in increasing democratization whie successful decenalzaion can only take place with democratic proces. AS Crook and Manor explained, perhaps because ofthe “fil of Communism, be potential contributions of decentralization to the enhancement of paricipaton, good governance, and democratization have received most eniphasi n0¥, pushing the more longstanding concem with ts role in economic develope into second place? Meanwhile, Burns, Hambleton, and Hoggct emphasize tut sound local government system sequires a combination of good managemet and democratic accountability. Theis argument is that decentralization offes fan atractive alternative to market models because potential, it can prove responsive, quality services, as well 52 range of possbities for stengthen8 citizen involvement inthe governing process ii From the Precolonial Barangay to the 1991 Local Government Code: The Evolution of Philippine Local Governments and Central-Local Relations ‘A.common assumption is that the current decentralization proces in Philippines sa complete break from an overly centralized past." However, ths perspective is simplistic because i loses sight of the country's localized pst and the deep tensions between central and local relations since formal Insitutions were established. Rood points out two problems in character the Philippines prior to the 1991 LGC solely as overcentalize. "Fst, localism lea wellknown characteristic of Phlppine politics. The center relies on local Foal rongmen who may in turn disegard administrative guidelines coming Fm the center. Second, there have been numerous shifts during Philippine fino ia the relative emphasis given to decentralization or centralization. 10 udton, Hutcheoftcriczes the overcenalized” view of scholars of Philippine public ministration because they tend to concentrate far more attention 10 femal sircutes of authority than on informal networks of power: Indeed, Jooking atthe history of cenralocal selations of the country, it can be seen that decentralization and the accompanying aotion of local autonomy are not 2 ew phenomenon. Infact, before the coming ofthe Spaniards in the sixteenth ‘eoury, almost eveything was localized, Of courte the formal centralized system troduced by the Spaniards aerward would have a lasting impact on the ‘solution of local governments inthe Philippines. Buc despite the centralizing trends, decentralization has always come inthe debates both within and outside the structures of power. I mus alo be pointed out that there are contradictions ‘thin historieal periods that are usualy characterized a formally centralized in Characer. This is hardly surprising for a country of thousands of islands. Ths, the scaled landmare LGC of 1991, whe indeed talblazing in # nantes ‘especs, isnot an abrupt break from the past buca result of long srugle foe ecentzation and local autonoay. Before the coming of Arab traders, scholars, and missionaries in the south lathe eary par ofthe fourteenth century and the arial of the Spaniards inthe second half ofthe sixteenth cenury, everything was local. The ancestors ofthe Flipinos established an indigenovs and autonomous political insttion known asthe barangay, which was composed of some thi to one hundred households Some of these small-sale politcal units were clustered together, but most of ‘hem “had nc attained a level of political erganiation above and beyond the [knchip principle But in some areas of the archipelago, the barangay later ‘nublshed confederations, such as the Islamic sultanates in Sulu and Maguindanao, which possessed more complex politcal organizations and more sophisticated economies ‘The Spanish colonizers then ntoduced a cenralzed sytem with the Spanish fevernor general asthe supreme authosty i ll local mates. They retained the indigenous barangay Cenamed as bar) as basic administrative units but Added other ties of local governments the pueblos (municipalities, cabridos (ties), and provincias (provinces), The Spanish governor-general was the supreme authority in all ocal matters, wid the subnational officials acting 28 Is agents and appointed by central authorities. Only toward the end ofthe Spanish egime was there any atempt to allow lei discretion nthe governance ‘focal affairs, The Maura Law of 1893 sought eforms inthe local government sytem by granting greater local autonomy to towns and provinces in Luzon alpina een a and Visayas and by allowing local ctzens to select some of their officals However, these reforms didnot have time to make much impact because the Philippine Revolusoa shoniy followed in 1898. According to Tapales, the Spanish period had impacts on the development of local governments in the Philippines. Fist, indigenous actives were ‘supplanted by puting in place an allen system of local government. Seconda high degree of cetraization in the capa of Mana in Luzon came to characeoe ‘atlonaloal relations for another century after the end of Spanish colonzae, Understandably, it was not realistic for 2 coloalal power to have autonomous local units a features of ts consolidated adminisrative setup. But despite the centralized character ofthe formal stractores ofthis period, contradictions ao existed. For instance, ia realty, authonty was divided berween the Spanish officials concentrated in “imperial Mania” and priests scared thoughout the archipelago, Thus, several other rather ironic impacts of the period can be added. The, the dvide-and-ule policy of Spanish colonzes, their concentration ‘ofall political activities in Manila and the ensuing neglect ofthe other eplons outside Manila, nd the curtailment of many elements of internal rade strengthened regionalism and the other regions’ contempe forthe center which remain strong untl today. Four, a the end of Spanish rule, there were sil areas inthe Philippines that considered themselves not part of the eersng ‘ation atl. This was because the Spaniards were unsuccessful in consolaing all the islands unde ther conwol. It was only in the mid-nineteenth century thatthe colonial government was extended to inciude the mountainous ierior fof Luzon, and footholds in Mindanao with the viual elimination of the Maguindanao sultanate. However, the Spaniards were unable to asx contol {n the Sulu archipelago.” And finally, the Spanish period left a local elite tat ‘would contiaue o play imponant roles in the decades ahead. ll Europea colonial administrations in Southeast Asia required cooperation from states Indigenous groups. This system depended on "patton and client links between several layers of local chiefs whose segmented polis ultimately gave them 4 cern standing that was recognized by the local populations." Thus, the dats for barangay headmen inthe Philippines were incorporated imo the Spanish colonial regime, They were dependent upon Spanish patronage and suppot but they also exercised considerable powers in their local areas. They Were responsible for x collection, w and order, snd public works. Increasing. powerful landed elites or caciques generally of mestizo heritage) emerge it the provinces. At the same time, the colonial admiration also indirect helped in te development ofthe tustradoclas who were atthe forefront of nationalist revolts and eventually the Philippine Revolution of 1898 “Then the Malolos Contin, the Framework ofthe Philippine revolutionary _govemment, provided for the creation of municipal and provincial assembles autonomous local uns, and popular and direct elections. Bu despite this leas! hep acl Geert nd ean in hips oo OOOO support fo local autonomy, the revolutionary government hada actualy cura Thal democracy. Ina sense, this was justified by the precarious times when fering national unity in a ledling nation was so essential. However, any plan aie fture to expind autonomy for local governments was crailed by the try of «new colonize "The American colonial pri (1900-1935) saw the promulgation ofa number of policies recognizing local autonomy. The system began with an emphasis on toa sel- government with the aim of bulding democracy from below, $0, municipal and then provincial elections were fist introduced before ational Uetions. However, American administrators discovered that Filipino elites who ‘ae toil posts in municipal government ‘were regula ‘mishandling pubic funds’ by voingallavaable revenue to pay fr teir own salaries” Concerned ‘wh nefcieny and corruption la local governance, Americans inkered with the liberal democrat ystem they introduced by moving toward centralization to prevent the "evils" of unrestricted and stil “untutored Fipino rule, For instance, the people inthe province and municipalities elected thei own officials tnd local units enacted ordinances, bu the ultimate control ofthese actions ‘vas lodged in Man Under the Americans, Mana became not only the politcal Contr bur the economic and cultural enter us well This was consistent wth the Americans’ objective of ist subjugting the Philippines and probably, the practicality ofco-opting the ruling elkesin the poliial structures already putin Place by the Spaniards. But centrifugal and tradtional forces were stil at work, While the United ‘sates steps to institute a new system, K ended up peeserving much ofthe Informal power structure and in ruling through the dustrado and caique lasses like thei Spanish predecesors and other colonial regimes in Southeast Asia, American administrators allowed the cooperative elements ofthe Filipino elite an increasingly larger eo in government for expediency purposes." But inthe proces they turned blind eye on the local elt who “enriched themseives at the expense of the peasants and increased their traikional power within the local communities In ato, despite effors to centralize key Manila bureaus ‘len lacked the capacity to supervise effectively. The bureaueracy created by the Americans was largely weak, Thus, American colonial role actually further reinforced the decentralized nature ofthe Pilppines "by concentrating fr less ‘onthe creation of central bureavcracy than onthe introduction of representative ‘nizations, Including 4 national leiatre that expanded opportunites for the expression of loci interests. in the end, the lustrado class not only took ‘contol of government a al levels a the Fipinization of the government Was completed, but though the electoral process, also organized themseves to protect theirs interests on national basis, But ulke ts Spanish predecessor, "he American colonial goverment was more succes penetrating the Musi seas in Mindanao initally hough bloody sultary campaigns and theseby Philp Pts nd oe terbcon = Incorporated these areas under the cenulized stroctute. Tis woul fel futher Muslim resistance and resentment against the predominantly Christian center ‘This resistance would fad diferent venues of expression ranging fom peal protests aginst ental policies to armed call for secession that would continue Up co the present day During the 1934-1935 Constitutional Convention, emerging Filipino leaders ‘were grouped Into two camps: those who favor strongetlocil governments, and those who consider state contol more imporant than local governenss ‘The second group won. Thus, the 1935 Constitution had no separate artle on local governments, in contrast with the two succeeding constitutions of the Pippin. In addition, the 1935 Constitution focmaly created a very pow Philippine president. Ths, the tend during the Commonwealth period, he ‘sanstonal government befor the granting of independence, was centaliaton Aside from the state-contol bias ofthe 1935 Consttation, some writers alo atibute the centralization tend tothe trong leadership syle of President Manuel Quezon. Quezon believed that under a unitary system, the national ci {executive should contrel ll local ofces. The result was that central supervision ‘apidly increased and was personally exercised by the president to 4 degree Previously unheard of, However. 25 Huichernft noted, Quezon was pimary ‘concerned wit cenualiang contol over patronage resources, Thu, he achieved sreat success in establishing central Jocal relations aimed at electoral objectives rather than promoting administrative effectiveness Formal certalization continued during the brief Japanese occupation (1982- 1945). As inthe case of the Spanish and American colonization of the Philippines and especialy since there was a wold war going on, an even greater degree of Central contol was imposed on local governments by the occupying power tough # national government where Filipinas collaborator, sil rom the same local elites that cooperated with the Americans, held postions. From the granting of formal independence in 1946 uni 1972, te general teend had been toward decentralization. Until 1950, national executive departments mide all administrative appoinuments 2 the provincial ad uid levels. However, they were generally made in consultation with the local politcal elite. A number of laws passed by Congress gave greater autonomy to lal sovernments through the gran of adeltional powers othe lessening of ational ‘control on local affairs, Significant legislative enactments include the Loc ‘Autonomy Act Republic Act RA 226), the Bano Charter (RA 2370, ater amended bby RA 3590), and the Decentralization Act of 1967 (RA 5185), The Supreme (Court also contsbuted to the cause of loeal autonomy by moving away from # liberal toa narrower interpretation of constutional power ofthe president f2 supervise focal governments, The decentralization tend culminated in the inclusion of a separate ancle on loel government in the draft of the ne constitution and the draft Integrated Reorganization Plan (RP). The draft Chg: Govern ed Bevin a Pipi —w—vw— censtion contied provisons uirstcing ol government autonomy, oa cart cone tn vn sures even aio lr eh, eter cen! Peteion, nd enactment of lo goverment cad, among es. The Tah meanwhile, seengened th eons But unde he af aw, Us Sel upentsd trough the Ofice of the Presiden and the various Spares te mcatne 3 far athe nal pn ets were once thy sted the tanaion formal independence 16. Toc! observes tate er conan Malye, Cambodia, nd laos bt unlike Dutch So te ipo Tolowed the sh fo ona eae colonia tivo postindependence et, saying ontop whe te wort changed beneath then Thus the postndependence period of decenralzation general trimced the les oa ees hemor, etal oa eats in he Philpine before he decaon ctrl nw i972 ifsc om ser devcopng lan cout at were hungeracl bythe widespread phenomenon of gt cena consol atthe Sie Accrlg to ednan, tis diference sang fom the oun sonal evap am ete frm stu sero lbe acompanic DY tw eancenons of goverment” Before the 17%, the Pippin area ‘Sl contiaonaly difremated prov govormets anda ase ofeaed forcing bean ofa at he yal an baroleve Aan fSnimued tat whe fran ours needed for govering were aay Tekin, competed and plc irc ayem ofan” ade the Phippine loc goverment system more autonomous than In ter Asian Cots, While ete of ystems peered wn Denes as wel 3 prt, he potential or contin devcopnent it not dscemble Seger in An erste the Pps” Toma among the eos ferdinand Macs marl law were th alton ofthe draft conttion withthe whole article on focal feveramens bythe iamous baringay" ofan asembles” and the tesa of he ID io law and executive order Asie fom hae legal stppos fr decentnlato, tte were oor intanes of decentalation Ghigo aia Law 192-181 Thee weet creton of aiisrive ‘eon, wih repionalofces of ferent minis as well as reponal Cevcopment coun fo enhance reins planing. The grated ea Seveopmen approach was ako adopted However, te abovementioned Secentatiaation measures were more drested toward adminisraive Secoceataon of egaon of autos othe fe les of ne agencies at mere mere esters of th el foeren her an ow he ‘rat Bunge of Ee ar alo ben ruc hte reorganization Flan ts docemaalzed responses to ens but wit severing thet Sependence on teil autores Rigorous mypersion procedures Ply Ps od Govern: aodcin a sccompancd! delegation of power fr planning and implementation, The ek rss that loal amination lacked confidence im pursing new programy dnd ideas. Or even they kad the competence do 0, ey Beste ake the inave “Thus, despite numerous and frequent change in loel government 8 we 2s thereto of increasing sel-goverament, the natonloral goverment ‘eltions during Manta Law were leary toward greater political centralization. Notwithstanding he guarantee of local autonomy inthe 1973 Constiton tere ‘were specie manfeatons of increasing cena cotol over lal fas and decreasing power, functions, and esponsbilies of lol government These ‘enlzing tends were: the executive's exercise of legilatve power, ning the power to create, merge, of abolish local governments, 8 a rau of the bolton of Congres the extent and scope of presenta power over loa ‘ficial, including te power to remove and appoin local offical, andthe ‘cena dieton inthe planning and implementation of development programs and projects, among ther" Moreover, ilusrasons of atempss to conto loc ‘cvs fom the cater incude the eat use of barangays to ratly marl ew institutions and the constant reorganization of foal stucures by presidental secres these pls the Increased powers Marcos gave the malsary made ot an unprecedented cenalzed system, in other words, 3 dato Following the formal ifing of marta aw in 1981, a Local Govern Code was enacted in 1989 pursuant to the 1973 Conston. Among the signifean provisions ofthe Code were: the pipe of liber interpretation of local government power favoring LGUs in the event of coficing interprets of powers of oa and national government) the reteaton of he innova {rodueed ding Maral Law; cea defaion of te role a fnctos of th 16Us and te degree of supervision by the cenml agencies; emphasis on th role of repona ofces 28 the point of contac beeen the national and oe fovemments; and system of recl of local fils. Bt despite the portant features of the Code, there were several negative tends that worked agaist decentalzation.® Obviously, Marcos Would not relingish conta 1 GUS Fr the Department of Local Government and Communi Development #38 ‘enamed the Minisy of acl Government anda separste and powerful nis) of Human Setements under Fest Lady Imelda Marcos eroded many of function ofthe fist deparmert/minsty Second regional nstiutions had se to protect suonge atonal presence in local areas although they might VE also provided channel of aces from the perpery tothe cent. Tis police were removed from municipal contol and centalzed under a ations) Srvc. This cenalizton of poi fonction was meant to reduce the PONE of local mayors who previously appointed police personel and who of? Used them as plate armies And out, the admnbtration’ pola pa the Kiusing Bagong pan (KBD, was the single source of oli pao a (Gap 6 ac Geena and eatin int Pips a | coving Marcos big inti prov rong snl ci ecetes. een a ana nissan penses conte have over he Jukof the govemments financial echald and human eources also backed pecan ° ‘After the 1986 EDSA People Power Revolution toppled the Marcos isuontip, he Pllpine goveriene headed by Conzon Agi renewed ‘Scene o peste dcceunlaon a anean of ating devopment ‘Sttandbjecven-Tns was expedite pote new ainstaton’s Srecpment progam (The Polly Agenda or People Oren dDeveopet) ‘he poem ted at he le and oie of goverment woud be pide bythe Key epunzatood pencils of decentalzaton, among ater. The lnisaton's commiinem to achieving rene decentazason was frber ‘clecdby textes proven naa ana nte 1987 Const. fee 2 (Decaraon of Principles snd Sate Pole), Seon 5, ys “The San shal ere the autonomy offal goverment” There aoa epi tetion ic goverment A 1 hrs nore ene han comer ‘hie 173 Constton. Ale 1 ha the folowing very import provisions creation of autonomous regions in Muslim Mindanao and the Codileca. 2. Granting to LGUs the power to create thei own sources of revenve and to levy taxes, fees, and charges. 3. Providing local governments with a just share ofthe national axes ‘which shall be automatically released to them. 4. Entiting local governments to an equitable share inthe proceeds ‘ofthe utizatin and development ofthe national wealth shin their respetive areas. 5. Providing for regional development councils or ther smiar bodies composed of local government officials, regional heads of ‘departments and other government offices, and representatives from NGOs within the region for purposes of administrative ecentralization o strengthen the autonomy ofthe units thereon ado accelerate the economic and social growth and development ‘ofthe units in the region. “The provisions of the 1987 Constitution would serve asthe legal precedent foc the enactment in 1989 of two laws creating autonomous regions in Muslin. Mindanao and the Cordilers, Then, ia 199, afer almost five years of debate in Congress, the Local Government Code or KA 7160 was enacted. Ths law is by far the most focused on devolution and democratic decentralization in the aunty, 1s also considered the most important piece of legislation to emerge rom the Aquino adainisation. pin bes aed Granted rr “The 1991 LGC i product of oth external and intemal for, although internal factors ply a stonger roe in terms ofthe acwal contents ofthe legal basis as well asthe dynamics fis implementation.” Decentralization has been caried out not solely forthe traditional public administration arguments bu, tore important, in light of ts democratic dimensions and other political Considerations, There are mixed motives and a conjuncture of pola factors in the decision to undenake decentralization. Fst, there are practical and sudminiscaive reasons. For decades and peaking with Marco's dictatorship, 3 formal centralized sracture failed to deliver services. This ale is especialy relevant in a diverse atchipelago of thousands of islands. In addition, oveiy Centelized formal mechanisms limited prospects for development in the countryside, ‘Second, the Philippines undertook decentralization ater the overthrow of Marcos for idealistic reasons. President Aquino, cvilsociety groups, various leagues of local governments, and some national legislators genuinely fet that

    You might also like