THE BENEFITS AND BURDENS OF THE PROPOSED FEDERALISM IN THE PHILIPPINES

Abila, Charmis Casella

Fernandez Jericha, Abby
Frilles, Joize
Galicia, Thalia
Julian, Justine Ivy
Senior High School Department, University of Santo Tomas Legazpi

A. INTRODUCTION

Federalism is known as one of the most effective way of governing a certain place. It is being one of the
many government system that is the main structure of different countries around the globe and one example of a
progressive country that uses federal system, the most popular governed country is the United States of America.
That political power is divided among multiple levels of government. The “federal” or “general” government, or the
national level of government. It is a government system that distributes some power to component entities while also
establishing a high level of government with a specified domain of authority. Even the balance between federal and
state power has shifted throughout U.S. history, with assertions of broad national power meeting challenges from
sovereignty. Federalism has been controversial political and legal in questions since the founding period.The Republic
of the Philippines is a highly centralized and has a Unitary Form of Government meaning the country is led by the
President as the head of the government. The assumption and view to the power of President Duterte made the
people raging and significant about the political and socioeconomic reforms, which led to a proposed shift from a
Unitary to a Federal form of Government.

Federalism has its own strengths and weaknesses. The economic growth will rise as each state will have its own
senate and its own economic income. The citizen’s participation will also increase because of the power not being
centralized in the hands of the national state government, but the sharing of power of the state governments. The
state government will be more responsive to the citizen’s needs. As for the negative impact of federalism to the
country. For example, it allows for inequalities between different states and the blockage of nationalist policies by
states.

Three countries with Federal System:

RUSSIA
The government of Russia is a federal semi-presidential republic, according to the 1993 Constitution. Under
a semi-presidential structure the President, and the Prime Minister share governing responsibilities as the head of state
and head of government, respectively. The President does, however, hold more power. Multiple political parties are
represented throughout the government and its administration. Three branches share the responsibilities of running
the country: the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch. (Pariona, 2016)
 The registered candidate who receives over 50 percent of the votes of those, who took part in the voting, is
to be declared the winner. The number of voters taking part in the voting shall be determined through the counting
of ballots in the ballot boxes. If more than two candidates are on the ballot and none of them is declared the winner,
the CEC shall take a decision on the second round for the two candidates, who received the largest number of votes
in the first round. The second round of balloting should be held 21 days after the first round. If one of the registered
candidates, who should take part in the second round removes his/her candidacy or cannot take part in the repeat
voting for any other reason, the CEC shall assign his/her place to the candidate with the third largest number of votes.
Following the second round, the candidate, who received more votes than the other candidate, taking part in the
repeat voting, shall be declared president. (Spuutnik News, 2018)

ARGENTINA

The Constitution guarantees the provinces the free enjoyment of their own provincial institutions without interference
of the federal government (Arg. Const., Sec. 122.), requiring solely that each member state enact its own constitution
under the republican representative form of government, that it guarantee at least those rights and guarantees
recognized by the federal Constitution, and that it secure the administration of justice, the municipal regime and the
primary education of its people9Arg. Const., Secs. 5, and 123). Under this clause, the whole federal Bill of Rights (the
first part of the Constitution, entitled “Declaraciones, Derechos y Garantías” (“Declarations, Rights and Guarantees”)
acts essentially as a minimum standard for provincial regulation as it is directly enforceable against the provinces. Yet,
these federal standards do not mean, as Joaquín V. González explained, a requirement that the local constitutions be
“an identical, word-for-word copy or an almost exact and equal copy of the national one. For the provincial
constitution is the code that condenses, organizes and gives imperative force to the whole natural law that the local
community has to govern itself, to all the inherent original sovereignty, which [sovereignty] has only been delegated
[to the central government] for the ample and broad purpose of founding the Nation. Therefore, within the legal
mold of the codes of rights and powers of a [provincial constitution,] there may be the broadest variety that can be
found in the diversity of the physical, social, and historical characteristics of each region or province, or in their
particular wishes or collective abilities” (Joaquín V. González, Manual de la Constitución Argentina, Pp. 648/49). As
indicated by one of the current Supreme Court justices, “federalism involves the recognition and respect towards the
identity of each province, which constitutes a source of vitality for the republic since it allows a plurality of experiments
and the provincial search of their own ways to design, maintain and perfect the local republican systems”.

Argentina is a federal republic consisting of 23 provinces and an autonomous district, Buenos Aires City. Still, the
main agent responsible for the collection of most taxes at the provincial level is the federal government. Most taxes
are collected nationally and then allocated between the federal government and across the provinces. This transfer
scheme is generically referred to as “Coparticipación Federal de Impuestos” (federal tax-sharing agreement). The first
such regime dates from 1934, and throughout the years it has been repeatedly altered. As a result of these successive
modifications, the tax sharing system has evolved into an intricate scheme. According to many observers, its current
configuration does not correspond with any economic criteria, and provides all sorts of perverse incentives (a salient
one being the incentive of provincial political leaders to overexploit the common pool of national taxation.) (Saiegh,
May 1999)
Argentina’s allocation of tax and spending authorities, and its system of intergovernmental transfers do not
correspond to any economic criteria and provide all sorts of perverse incentives and obstacles for sound economic
policies. It is considered by specialists as an insufficient government. (Tommasi, 2001)

According to Transparency.org, Corruption in Argentina is one of the biggest challenges currently facing the country.
It is estimated that corruption cost the Argentine economy over US$6.2 billion between 1990-2013. The social and
economic impact of corruption in the country is huge, especially affecting the quality and efficiency of public services,
such as education, health and transportation. In 2012 52 people died in a train crash as a result of neglect and
corruption.

Argentina ranks 107 out of 175 in Transparency International´s Corruption Perceptions Index, far behind its
neighboring countries, Uruguay, Chile and Brazil.

Argentina is one of only four countries in Latin America that still does not have a national law that guarantees access
to public information. Various international treaties ratified by Argentina and even Argentina’s constitution recognize
access to information as a human right.

Retrieved from: transparency.org,No date (A Transparency Agenda for Argentina)

https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/a_transparency_agenda_for_argentina

Argentina is undergoing significant changes regarding the investigation and prosecution of human rights violations
that occurred from 1976 to 1983, when the country was ruled by a military dictatorship and an estimated 10,000 to
30,000 people “disappeared.” This paper outlines transitional justice developments in Argentina and explores the
history behind these advances. Various governments have implemented a range of initiatives pertaining to truth-
seeking, prosecutions, and reparations since Argentina’s return to democracy in 1983. Raul Alfonsín, the first
democratically elected president after the end of military rule, inherited a weakened democratic infrastructure and a
strong military that actively resisted accountability for past crimes, frustrating initial justice efforts. However, some
key military leaders were successfully prosecuted in two major landmark trials. In 1989 and 1990, President Carlos
Menem issued two pardons, one for a handful of officers who were still facing trials, and another for those who had
already been convicted. This was a blow for victims and their families, and foreclosed many options to continue
pursuing justice for past crimes. Several cases were opened in the courts in the latter half of the 1990s, and have
continued since. An economic crisis that started in the late 1990s and reached its peak in December 2001 drew focus
away from, but did not halt, transitional justice initiatives. Since Nestor Kirchner was elected president in May 2003,
he has been addressing issues of justice for the violations committed more than 25 years ago. There is a movement
to end impunity for human rights abusers in Argentina. This is partly because of the support of recent governments,
but also a result of years of hard work by Argentine human rights organizations, initiatives of the Argentine judicial
system, and the contribution of activists who established a strong base of information and continued to work for
justice for victims.
(Retrieved from: https://www.ictj.org/sites/default/files/ICTJ-Argentina-Accountability-Case-2005-English.pdf)

The initial innovative institutional designs in Argentina date back to the 1990s and the 2000s when various
mechanisms started to involve citizens in the projection and decision-making of policies related to housing, food,
health, social assistance, and access to basic rights. In the context of increasing unemployment, poverty and
marginalization of certain social sectors, which culminated in the political-institutional crisis of 2001, society sought
new forms of interaction by fostering horizontal ties and inaugurating various self-managed and non-institutionalized
assemblies and participatory spaces. On the other hand, at the state level, since the 1994 constitutional reform, there
have been several mechanisms of direct democracy recognized constitutionally. Its institutional designs have shown
replicas in the provincial constitutions, which in the Argentine federal system have a broad range of powers. The most
consolidated example is the Participatory Budget, implemented in numerous municipalities and with an institutional
framework recognized through local ordinances and provincial laws. Subsequently, since the decade of 2010,
democratic innovations started to address other types of social rights. For instance, cultural themes; minority
recognition policies; social, cultural and political inclusion of traditionally excluded groups; and citizen security. These
innovations were being driven mainly by the national government and regional and local governments aligned at that
time. In other cities and regions, where government parties followed a different political line, the growth of initiatives
aimed at strengthening digital governance, transparency in management and election periods, and the development
of online management tools that provide spaces for dialogue between governments and citizens.

In this context, both the assemblies, deliberative and participatory spaces for the formulation of policies, proposals,
bills and collegial-consultative bodies represent an important sector of the democratic innovations implemented in
Argentina. Some of these bodies belong to institutional structures created by the government of Cristina Fernández
de Kirchner and play the role of accompanying the implementation of national policies at the local and provincial
level.

There are also numerous cases of co-management of resources between the state and the civil society, mainly in
housing, land ownership and rural production and development.

In addition, the numerous citizen initiatives for monitoring, developed in many cases by civil society groups or
organizations or by independent efforts, have culminated in the production of various web platforms and mobile
phone apps. These tools aim to control compliance with public policies, mapping situations of insecurity and
controlling corruption and compliance with electoral regulations.

(Retrieved from: https://www.latinno.net/en/country/argentina/)

An assessment team composed of experts in disaster management, logistics, health and information, members from
the Argentine Red Cross, the Federation’s sub regional office based in Buenos Aires, the regional delegation in Lima,
the Pan American Disaster Response Unit (PADRU) and the Spanish Red Cross, were mobilized to assess damage
and needs and to work on a plan of action. Following the damage and needs assessment carried out together with
other actors in the field, the ARC operation will focus on provision of food and non food items, hygiene and kitchen
kits, and the promotion of hygiene in the evacuation centres. The operation also seeks to enhance community disaster
preparedness in the event of future disasters. The Argentine Red Cross will provide assistance to 8,000 persons (1,600
families) who are accommodated in 16 evacuation centres in Santa Fé. The assistance comprises one month of food
assistance, hygiene kits, cooking sets, and water storage containers. In addition, further food assistance will be
provided, together with psycho-social support to some 4,000 people obliged to remain in shelters for a longer period.
On their return appeal no. 10/03; Argentina: Floods in Santa Fé Province operations update no. 1 3 home, 800
families will be provided with cleaning kits consisting of two brooms, a large garbage bag and gloves to help them
clean their homes. In addition, each beneficiary family will receive a 20 litre water storage container.

(Retrieved from: http://www.ifrc.org/docs/appeals/03/100301.pdf)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

United States of America has a full presidential system which is led by the president who rules both the head of
state and the head of government. In the late 20th century and early 21st century the movement “New Federalism”
appeared in which it transfers a certain amount of power from the United States federal government back to the states
itself. This increased the participation of the citizens and it is more efficient to the country because of the power that
is shared by the state government. And since this power is shared equally. Each state government in the U. S. has its
own economic income. Despite of having advantages or strengths, Federalism in U. S. also have weaknesses. It has a
history of slavery and segregation. This caused the inequality of the country between different states. New Federalism
is also called “States Rights”, though the proponents is usually not proper the latter term because of the connections
with Jim Crow and the segregation.

In the U.S. “The nature of the judicial system is critical to the Rule of Law. Impartial judges, governed by clear legal
rules, committed to enforcing the rules as written, independent of political influence are essential if law is to be a
reliable guide to individuals and a constraint on those in power." (Cass, R. 2008). The transparency in the U.S.
provides the information in the central to global governmental reforms that targeted anti-corruption programs (Katz,
S. 2001). The Responsiveness in the political aspects is one of the goals of the democratic government, the
government can also be a representative without having a responsiveness direct mechanism. The US government
truly has become far less effective and efficient due to the conservative nature of the Supreme Court and both major
political parties. These obstacles taken all together prevent all attempts to improve government or to bring it into
conformance with real world factuality. We have become a nation in which law making is not done by our elected
representatives but by the Supreme Court as they extend their power through their own opinions as opposed to
textual interpretation of our constitution. And this puts us in the position of electing a president who will decide
whose opinions will make all the laws, not just for 4 years, but for 2 or 3 generations. (Coburn, M. 2016). From the
year 2006 to 2016, the U.S. civilian labor force participation rate has increased from 62 to 67 range, with a consistent
decrease in the participation rate since 2009. The decline in the participation rate has been attributed to structural
changes and not the overall health of the economy. This structural change in the number of people actively seeking
work has occurred due to retiring baby boomers, a decline in working women, and more people deciding to attend
college. The U.S. is also tough in ensuring the accountability of their country when it comes to the international
organizations. The chain of delegation got longer, and the global agencies are to likely behave in that departs the
wishes of the citizens and their elected representatives in the White House and Congress. The equity and inclusiveness
are essential to the country. The following services are provided in the vision for the United States Capitol Police, the
talents, skills, and abilities of the USCP workforce such as training, professional development, mentoring and
coaching, employee resource groups, speaker series, and policy review.

The first necessary condition of federalism is the division of sovereignty between the central government and the
constituent units. By of necessity dividing sovereignty, federalism poses a challenge to the traditional absolutist
Bodinian conception of sovereignty. At the same time, federalism's division of sovereignty equally means that each
level of government is sovereign in a robust Bodinian sense in its own sphere of jurisdiction. If each level of
government was not absolutely sovereign in its own sphere, then a system of government would not be truly federal.
As such, although federalism divides sovereignty, it does not dilute it (Hescovitch,2013). Many authors agree that the
fragile balance between self-rule and shared rule must be given unto account and there are ups and downs in terms
of centralization (Fossum & Jachtenfuchs, 2017). Federal system not just focuses on territories of the member of the
State but also to the states who are dependent. If the member States were to Retain responsibility for the defense of
any such territory, the States might tend to pursue foreign policies, to incur financial obligations and to use each of
their industrial and manpower facilities when in conflict with the programs of the federation as a whole (Bowie &
Friedrich,1954).

The ideas behind the federal system are both simple and profound. The state governments had virtually unlimited
powers, but limited amounts of money. It could not "print money" to support fund its programs. It states that the
government will have unlimited power because each state will have its own government but it will also have limited
amount of money. It can certainly affect the education because the government has the authority to allocate the taxes,
meaning the state can pick specific areas that needs more monetary support (Cantañeda,2016). The major restriction
to Philippine development is the resources and power to deploy in the hands of the national government. This has
been inefficient in the delivery of government services and it worsens regional inequalities by issues concerned to
those who have the power. Reducing this concentration is an important step in addressing the long-standing poverty
and uneven economic growth. Federalism facilitates the balanced the distribution of power and resources between
national and subnational levels and in the delivery of government services (Miral, 2017). Improvement of local
economy is considered as one of the positive effects of federalism by allowing local governments have more power
over their resources. In the Philippines’ current form of government, local government units have to turn a big bulk
of their funds to the national government. Enabling states or autonomous regions to use the majority of their funds
for their own development and without needing a go signal from Malacañang would reduce conflict and problems.
(Miral, 2017). The distribution of power and authority to the provinces and local regions is highly controlled by the
central government of the Philippines. In contrast, shifting to a federal system will give more freedom for local regions
to develop their economic standing without the approval of the central government. (Buendia, 1989). Federalism is a
good fit for the Philippines given its geographical and diverse cultural situation. Changing the distribution of power
of the country would improve the relationship among Filipinos and enhance unity as well. However, insisting that
before we abduct these transformations the public should first understand the conditions that would stand as bases
on choosing what kind of model or system our country needs and fully articulate the objectives, visions, as well as the
consequences for initiating constitutional revision and how these changes would impact their lives (Castañeda, 2016).
According to the United Nations (2006) and the Forum of Federations (2009), out of 193 countries in the international
community, there are 24 countries having federal political systems with their own individuality. Each of these states
has successful experiences in federalism, decentralization, cultural preservation, geographical situation, regional
economic development and distribution of resources (Amoretti & Bermeo, 2004). The planning and budgeting of
cycle comes in when provinces starts setting the guidelines for the updating the databases and financial indicators to
cities and municipalities (Paderanga, 2012).

According to the paper it states that the Philippines is currently has the highest poverty rate among South East Asian
countries. Poverty will always be inevitable if the low economic growth will continue and will lead to lack of productive
employment so the number of unprivileged families will continue to rise (Miral, 2017). The central government must
always retain a core of functions over essential and national matter. Most people still argues that the central
government still continues to reign the power over bureaucracy. For some Philippine central politicians across regimes
have well enforced structural manipulations and administrative constraints to weaken the local power and take control
over the broader shares of national resources (Gera, 2009). Federalism must be studied thoroughly in order to avoid
inequality between the states that may lead to unhealthy competition and that will result to corruption
(Cantañeda,2016). It’ll take time for the Philippines to make a successful transition to federalism, not to mention the
several adjustments that concern that life of every citizen that will be affected. Is it advisable for our country to change
the government into federal? Federalism will require numerous solutions to solve problems and consequences that
come with change. If not, the change of government system will do more harm than good (Duron, 1992). Although
there are positive and negative effects of federalism, the Philippines do not need a change of government but rather
the need of strengthening the centralized government must be a matter of priority. Shifting to federalism is a huge
step to take for the Philippines. If the implementation of the federal system pushes through, it may just make our
situation more complicated. Taking onto account that each country has its own preferred government system,
considering their uniqueness of territory and cultural diversity, we may not be ready and cannot afford the change of
government system (Bednar, 2011).
The study aims to
1. Assess the strengths and weaknesses of federalism as seen in Argentina, USA, and Russia
2. To evaluate federalism as seen in countries using the eight elements of good governance as a device for
evaluation
3. To articulate the possible effects of federalism in terms of governance to the Philippines
4. To come up with a draft of federalism applicable to Philippine setting

B. Methods

The research paper is a Social Critical Research that will use Primary Data Analysis and Secondary Data Analysis as a
means of data gathering tool: the researchers will get the essential features of Federalism and from there will articulate
its possible Benefits and Burdens.

Conceptual Framework
Conceptual Framework

USA ARGENTINA RUSSIA

Rule of Law

Transparency

Responsiveness

Consensus Oriented

Effectiveness and Efficiency

Equity and Inclusiveness

Accountability

Participation

Federalism
 Possible Effects of
Federalism

Proposal of Federalism