I.

ISSUES, CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A. ARTA Disciplinary Provisions

The existing ARTA disciplinary provisions include a 30-day suspension without pay for light
offenses and mandatory attendance to values orientation program; three-month suspension without pay
for second offense; and dismissal and perpetual disqualification from service for third offense. On the
other hand, the penalty for grave offenses such as fixing is dismissal and perpetual disqualification from
service with a P20,000.00- P200,000.00 sanction (ARTA Implementing Rules and Regulations, Section
1, Rule VIII-Disciplinary Actions).
In view of the increase in the compensation of public officials and employees brought by the
recently enacted salary standardization law (SSL), the P20, 000. 00 – P200, 000 penalty may not be as
valuable as before. Simply put, the perks accrued from fixing activities may just be higher than the cost of
violating the ARTA alone.
Hence, there is a need to review the sanctions to check these are still at par with the evolving
demands of public service. A strategic and more flexible solution would be to enforce a cost of penalty
based on a factor of salary, such that:

Light/First Offense- 30-day suspension without pay + 50% of a service officer’s

annual gross income at the time of the commission of offense + fixing costs, if there
were any

Second Offense- three-month suspension without pay + 70% of a service of a

service officer’s annual gross income at the time of the commission of the offense
+ fixing costs, if there were any

Third/Grave Offense- dismissal and perpetual disqualification from service + 100%

of a service officer’s annual gross income at the time of the commission of the
offense + fixing costs, if there were any

1
 Further, while Section 1, Rule V of the IRR provides that the head of an agency/office is primarily
responsible and accountable for the implementation of ARTA (ARTA Implementing Rules and Regulations,
2007), administrative sanctions for heads of most complained service offices/ or those consistently failing
the ARTA RCS (habitually delinquent agencies) should be strengthened, such that, an accountable agency
head with direct supervision over the erring service officer should bear the same disciplinary sanctions.

B. Create a Multi-sector Bureaucratic Audit and Advisory Board or Council (MBAAB/C)

The existing key players in the implementation of the ARTA are the Civil Service Commission
(CSC), the Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP) and the Office of the Ombudsman. Within the
Civil Service Commission’s Public Assistance and Information Office is a small ARTA Project Management
Unit, with few personnel complement doing the bulk of technical work.

While hiring additional technical people or project managers may sound helpful, with the
seriousness and urgency of the red tape situation nationwide, and with over a million of government
employees to monitor and indoctrinate on public service values and efficiency, the CSC needs a more
collaborative and sound ARTA strategy.

A Multi-sector Bureaucratic Audit and Advisory Board or Council may be reconstituted with inter-
agency members composed of the Civil Service Commission (CSC), the National Economic and
Development Authority (NEDA), the National Competitiveness Council (NCC), the Development Academy
of the Philippines (DAP), the Office of the Ombudsman, the Department of Interior and Local Government
(DILG), the Commission on Audit (COA), and the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Other sectors should also be equally represented, through membership of: (a) a representative
from a Non-Government Organization (NGOs) with strong ARTA advocacy to speak for the people
(b)representatives from the business sector (e.g Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Makati
Business Club, etc) (c) representatives from the academe of leading higher educational institutions such
as the UP-NCPAG; and (d) President of the Confederation of Employee Unions to represent the service

2
 officers . The Board shall directly report its accomplishments to the Office of the Cabinet Secretary (OCS)
under the Office of the President.

The Multi Sector Bureaucratic Audit and Advisory Board shall develop a Strategic ARTA
Management Monitoring, Evaluation and Research Framework, perform periodic assessment of the red
tape situation in the country, develop action plans, and establish a common regulatory impact analysis/tool
that will be used to measure administrative burdens across offices. Regulatory policies, such as executive,
department, administrative orders/circulars, legislation and ordinances should pass the screening process
for regulatory impact analysis/evaluation to ensure that these are research-based, consultative,
results/outcome-driven, have simplified implementation plan/framework, and will not unfavorable effects on
the performance of the country in global competitiveness indicators.

The “Project Repeal” of the DTI- NCC is a very good project to start with. It aims to clean up regulations
and legislation by repealing provisions or rules that are no longer necessary or may be detrimental to the economy
(Luz, 2017). The overall goal is to reduce the cost of compliance for entrepreneurs and the cost of administration and
enforcement for the government (Luz, 2017).

The CSC as the key implementer of ARTA should find a way to help institutionalize the “Project
Repeal,” or at least enhance the project by pushing for repeal, not just of policies that benefits the business
sector, but also those that has a bearing on the “commoners” such as frontline and social services.

Since the Board, by principle of “catalytic government,” (Osborne and Gaebler, 1992) capitalizes on
the private sector and NGOs in helping solve societal problems, and uses inter-agency coalitions, the
government can develop strategic ARTA initiatives and will have a stronger foundation for enforcement. As
a support mechanism, the interagency members can issue joint administrative orders (JAOs) in support of
its trust to eradicate ARTA.

C. Develop a Comprehensive Regulatory Impact Analysis or Evaluation Tool to Measure Administrative

Burdens

The OECD Regulatory Policy Committee (RPC) in Europe has been assisting member and non-
member economies in building and strengthening their regulatory reform efforts. It has become a platform to

3
help countries adapt regulatory policies, tools and institutions, and learn from each other’s experience.
(Regulatory Policy Committee, 2017). Since its institution in 2002, the RPC has been consistently conducting
research, dialogues and best practices sharing among member and non-member states.

The RPC Expert Paper No. 1, s. 2012 on Measuring Regulatory Performance (Coglianese, 2012),
presents a sample policy evaluation tool1 used by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to check the impact of its policies. Also, the government of Ireland has a RIA Screening2 Tool for its agencies
(OECD Regulatory Policy Division, 2008) which can serve as guide for the Philippines.

Since RIA has been successful in OECD and Scandinavian countries, our government should adopt
and institutionalize a comprehensive Regulatory Impact Analysis or Evaluation Tool to measure
administrative burdens not just of existing regulatory policies, but even of proposed policies or regulations by
service offices. The tool should also feature social indicators to assess impact on cultures, norms and other
societal values.

1
See Box 1, pp. 16
2
See Box 2, pp.17

4
5
Source: https://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/1_coglianese%20web.pdf, pp. 20

Box 2. Screening RIA in Ireland

6
 Source: http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/40984990.pdf

D. Include ARTA Score in Agency Performance Indicators, in Budget Deliberation and in the
Guidelines for the Grant of Performance-based Bonus (PBB).

An assessment of agency performance indicators of most complained service offices such as the
Bureau of Customs (BOC) reveals that the major final outputs (MFO) was too focused on tax collection,
revenue generation and apprehension of people. The only Qualitative ARTA indicator was Client Satisfaction
based on “compliance to Citizen’s Charter” and “rating of policies as good, better, best” (Bureau Form B-
Performance Indicator, 2012).

In order intensify ARTA enforcement, the CSC should collaborate with DBM to require as an MFO
or performance measure of service offices, the “Overall ARTA Score” which will include (a) the ARTA RCS
Rating (b) Number of ARTA-related Complaints received by the Hotline 8888; and (c) result of RIA Evaluation
Score3 of its policies and regulations.

The above factors should also be considered in justifying budget augmentations and the Guidelines
on the Grant of the Performance-based Bonuses (DBM Memo Circular 2017-1, 2017).

E. Feedback Mechanisms

Customer-driven governments as introduced by Osborne and Gaebler (1992) are governments that
make an effort to perceive the needs of customers or the people. They use surveys and focus groups to listen
to their customers. This concept is crucial to participatory and inclusive governance, hence it is important that
our government has a quicker and simpler feedback platform. While feedback mechanisms are in place in
most government offices, these mechanisms require tedious effort and too much formality. In pursuing a
complaint alone, transparent imposition/enforcement of administrative penalties (none self-serving) remains
a question.

3
Requires the development of a RIA Evaluation Tool

7
 Though most service offices have Suggestion Boxes and Public Action and Complaints Desks
(PACD), these should be monitored to assess functionality. Spot surveys should be intensified. More
importantly the general public should be educated available feedback mechanisms and should be
empowered to provide feedback. In this light, the CSC has been conducting ARTA Caravans across the
nation to educate the public of the mechanisms available to them.

Apart from the abovementioned strategies, streamlining feedback mechanisms may prove effective
if platforms are readily available online. A more comprehensive online feedback mechanism, embracing all
government agencies may be developed. One good example that should be replicated by the Philippines is
the eCitizen portal used by the Government of Singapore. The portal accords the Singaporeans an online
platform where they can provide feedback on a particular government policy or issue; and feedback
/complaints are automatically coursed to the relevant government/action agencies. Action agencies will then
address the issues/concerns (https://www.reach.gov.sg/) raised by citizens.

F. Capacitate and Cultivate Public Service Ethos in Public Servants

Alongside corruption and red tape, the public sector is also proliferated with inefficiency (Brilliantes
Jr. & Fernandez, 2011). If every initiative against red tape is a failure, the problem could be deeper –either
competency gap or ethical orientation. Hence, there is a need to re-indoctrinate service officers with Public
service values, and improve their technical competencies.

The government of Singapore has been a living model to the success of training on reforming its
public servants and institutions. The Singaporean Civil Service Institute has cultivated ethos in public service
and made Administrative Service Officers (AOs) more concerned, responsible and responsive to national
welfare. The PS21 (Public Service for the 21st Century) introduced concepts such as performance indicators
to improve efficiency and build competencies in the public service (Low, 2015)

Relative thereto, training and cultivating public service ethos should be made more economical and
accessible to all. This could be done in the form of: (a)geographical expansion of government training
institutions such as the Civil Service Institute (CSI), the Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP), and
the Local Government Academy (LGA), (b) forging a partnership with forerunner Public Administration State
Universities and Colleges (SUCS) such as the UP-NCPAG (University of the Philippines–National College of
8
Public Administration and Governance); and (c) Including in the curricula of schools the Modules on Ethics,
Accountability, and Service Delivery Excellence. Government employees especially in the most marginalized
areas, Local Government Units (LGUs), and most complained service offices will definitely benefit from these
strategies.

II. CONCLUDING NOTES

In our fight against red tape, the value of a strong political will cannot be overemphasized. To my
view, President Rodrigo Duterte is just in time. No leader in the history of the Philippines raised a strong fist
against bureaucratic red tape, corruption and inefficiency.

However it should be noted that a visionary leader is feeble if not supported by civil servants of merit
and fitness, who knows the intricacies of strategic and operational frameworks for reforms.

. In order to fight red tape, paradigm shift is a must. As citizens, we need to refrain from
overdependence on regulatory agencies in solving our bureaucratic and social dilemmas. We needed to be
part of a mobilized sector of the citizenry- an NGO/CSO volunteer who works, an academe with strong
philosophical values who critics yet asserts solutions; and a vigilant and informed public.

More importantly, the public servants should be guided by Mahatma Gandhi’s philosophy on
SERVICE-ABILITY; but for purposes of this paper, the word “customer” will be substituted into the word “A
Filipino” for contextual application in the Philippine bureaucracy:

“A Filipino (customer) is the most important visitor in our premises.

He is not dependent on us. We are dependent on him.

He is not an interruption of our work. He is the purpose of it.

He is not an outsider of our business. He is part of it.

We are not doing him a favour by serving him.

He is doing us a favour by giving us the opportunity to do so.”

9
 #

RFERENCES

1. ARTA Project Status Report. (2015). Civil Service Commission. Retrieved from
http://www.csc.gov.ph/iTransparency/file_upload/CSC%20CO/2015/566E3CB538991.pdf

2. Bondoc, J. (2017 January 20). Some Suggestions for Hotline 8888. The Philippine Star. Retrieved
from http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2017/01/20/1664383/some-suggestions-hotline-8888

3. Breakthrough: Game Changers in Public Frontline Service Delivery. (2015). Civil Service
Commission. An ARTA Coffee Table Book.

4. Brilliantes Jr, A. & Fernadez, M. (2011). “Restoring Trust and Building Integrity in the Government:
Issues and Concerns in the Philippines and Areas for Reform,” a paper presented at the 2nd
Annual International Conference of the Asian Association for Public Administration, held on
February 7-9 2011 at the University of Indonesia. International Public Management Review.
Retrieved from http://ncpag.upd.edu.ph/wp- content/uploads/2014/03/Brillantes-
Fernandes_IPMR_Volume-12_Issue-2.pdf

5. Bureau of Customs Agency Performance Indicator (2012). Retrieved from customs.gov.ph/wp-

content/uploads/2012/11/MFO-Performance-Indicators.pdf

6. Catholic Church still most trusted; gov’t, business least trusted in EON survey. (2015). Retrieved
from http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Nation&title=catholic-church-still-most-
trusted-gov&8217t-business-least-trusted-in-eon-survey&id=117421

7. Coglianese, C. (2012). Measuring Regulatory Performance, Evaluating the Impact of Regulation

and Regulatory Policy. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-
policy/1_coglianese%20web.pdf

8. DBM Memorandum Circular No. 2017-1. (2017). Guidelines for the Grant of Performance-Based
Bonus (PBB) for Fiscal Year 2017 under Executive Order No.80 s.2012 and Executive Order No.
201 s. 2016. Retrieved from www.dbm.gov.ph/wp-
content/.../2017/Memorandum%20Circular/MC2017-1.pdf

9. Doing Business 2007. (2006). Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-

release/2006/09/05/doing-business-2007

10. Doing Business 2017. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-

reports/doing-business-2017

10
11. Denhardt R. & Denhardt J. (2011). New Public Service: Serving rather than Steering. Retrieved
from http://www.csus.edu/indiv/s/shulockn/.../par-denhardt%20new%20public%20service.pdf

12. Inaugural Address of President Rodrigo Roa Duterte. (30 June 2016). Retrieved from
http://www.gov.ph/2016/06/30/inaugural-address-of-president-rodrigo-roa-duterte-june-30-2016/

13. London, S. (1994). Book review of Reinventing Government by David Osborne and Ted Gaebler.
Retrieved from http://www.scottlondon.com/reviews/osborne.html

14. Low, J. (2015). Learning and Executive Development in Reforming the Singapore Public Service
from 1959-2001(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://journal.hkpaa.org.hk/index.php/paap-
journal/fall-2015/view_document/116- learning-and-executive-development-in-reforming-the-
singapore-public-service-from- 1959-to-2001?tmpl=component.

15. Luz, G. (2016 August 27). Project Repeal: in search of regulatory relief. The Philippine Daily
Inquirer. Retrieved from http://opinion.inquirer.net/96837/project-repeal-in-search-of-regulatory-
relief

16. Mercurio, R. (2016 October 27). Philippines boosts global ranking in ease of doing business. The
Philippine Star. Retrieved from
http://www.philstar.com:8080/business/2016/10/27/1637573/philippines-boosts-global-ranking-
ease-doing-business

17. Osborne, D. & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is
Transforming the Public Sector. Retrieved from
https://books.google.com.ph/books/about/Reinventing_Government.html?id=7qyp_EcJuZoC&sourc
e=kp_cover&redir_esc=y

18. Palabrica, R. (2016). Bureacratic Red Tape. The Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved from
http://business.inquirer.net/211995/bureaucratic-red-tape

19. Regulatory Policy Committee (2017). Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-

policy/regulatory-policy-committee.htm

20. Regulatory Policy Division Directorate for Public Governance and Territorial Development. (2008).
Building an Institutional Framework for Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA): Guidance for Policy
Makers. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/40984990.pdf

21. Republic Act No. 9485- An Act To Improve Efficiency in The Delivery of Government Service To
The Public By Reducing Bureaucratic Red Tape, Preventing Graft And Corruption, And Providing
Penalties Therefor. (2007). Retrieved from
http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2007/ra_9485_2007.html

22. Result of the 2016 RCS. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.csc.gov.ph/slider/1223-result-of-2016-

report-card-survey.html

23. Reyes, D. (1994). Reinventing Government and Bureaucracy in the Philippines: Old Themes and
New Image? Philippine Journal of Public Administration. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/qRBs6i

11
24. World Economic Forum. (2016). Philippine Competitiveness Ranking. Retrieved from
http://www.competitive.org.ph/rankings/wef-globalcompetitivenessreport.php

12