Elijah Inacay 12-Jose Rizal EAPP Position Paper

With the presidency of Rodrigo Roa Duterte comes the proposition of changing the form

of government in the Philippines into federalism. Federalism, according to Encyclopædia

Britannica (2019), is a “mode of political organization that unites separate states or other polities

within an overarching political system in a way that allows each to maintain its own integrity

(para. 1).” The aim is to disperse political powers among areas while still maintaining

coordination across power centers. Federalism is not a novel idea to the Philippines, according to

Romeo Manongas, then-Regional Project Officer for Federalism of the Department of Interior

and Local Government, in a regional training last October 25-26, 2018 (as cited in Mercado,

2018). He stated that Dr. Jose Rizal first envisioned a federal government in the Philippines on

his essay "Las Filipinas Dentro de Cien Anos" (The Philippines a Century Hence) published by

the propaganda paper La Solidaridad in 1899 (as cited in Mercado, 2018). University of the

Philippines professor Jose Abueva and former senator Aquilino Pimentel Jr. also both argued

that a federal government is essential to efficiently cater to the needs of the country (as cited in

Mercado, 2018). Several concerns were raised with the proposition, saying that federalism may

further divide the country and lose its identity, or that economic disparities would worsen in a

federal government, as evidenced by its effect on other entities with federal systems like the

United States of America, India, and Yugoslavia (Heydarian, 2018).

The question that begs to be answered is: “should federalism be implemented in the

Philippines?” This is a rather fallacious question to ask because as said by then Officer-In-

Charge and Commissioner for the Commission on Higher Education Dr. J. Prospero E. De Vera
in a symposium held in University of the Philippines, Los Baños last March 12, 2018; “there is

no one model of Federalism, there is no one shape of Federalism, there is no one way of going

Federal (as cited in Doguiles, 2018, para. 1).” However, putting only the main idea of federalism

into question, implementing Federalism would be beneficial to the Philippines. Given the

archipelagic location of the sovereignty, it is difficult for the current unitary government to

attend to all the needs of all areas. In a federal government, local government units or polities

would be given more power and will be able to fulfill their duties to their constituents. It is ideal

for a more equalized handling of the masses, and may even promote economic growth in now

rural communities.

Existing economic gaps between areas would widen. An argument from those who

oppose the implementation of a federal system concerns economic differences. A point to make

however is in the premise of federalism wherein it states that the polities to be made are either of

fairly equal population and wealth or have balanced socio-economic inequalities. If the areal

divisions to be formed upon the implementation of the federal system in the Philippines follow

this equality principle, economic gaps would fade, if not completely disappear.

Federalism could lead to absolute autonomy of a polity. Since federalism has been

dubbed as a covenant between the polities involved, all polities must coordinate and establish

perpetual covenant of union, usually in the form of a written constitution. A federal state could

not separate from the federal government since the state has already agreed to its involvement

and inclusion and doing so would be a violation to the constitution.

 Political dynasties and “warlords” could become more powerful in a federal system.

Although this may be true, political dynasties are not necessarily a problem. A politician’s mere

relationship to a fellow politician, may it be by consanguinity or affinity, is not in and of itself a

condition worth prohibiting. Complications only arise when politicians involve personal biases in

their duties and deliver crooked services or not deliver at all, in which case, the problem is the

politician itself, not its relationships to fellow politicians. In the case of federalism, should a

political dynasty be corrupt, the blame should be put on the politicians involved, not the federal

system itself.