GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES

 The Philippines government is modeled after the U.S. government. It has a President, Vice
President and Congress with a Senate and a House of Representatives. The main difference
between the two systems is that the Philippine constitution limits the Presidents to one six year
term (he or she can not be reelected for a second term); senators to two consecutive six-year
terms and representatives to three three-year terms. There are also separate ballots for the
President and Vice President.
 Political and judicial institutions in the Philippines are regarded as weak. The functioning of
government has been hampered by coup threats, insurgencies, street protests, and
impeachment proceedings. To relieve the "chronic gridlock" in the Filipino legislative system, the
U.S. national Security Council has suggested that the Philippines switch from a Congressional to
a parliamentary system.
 Government type: republic. The republican form of government that was developed during the
commonwealth period when the Philippines was a possession of the United States. Under the
Constitution, the government is divided into executive, legislative, and judicial departments. The
separation of powers is based on the theory of checks and balances. The presidency is not as
strong as it was under the 1973 constitution. Local governments are subordinated to the national
government. Independence: 12 June 1898 (independence proclaimed from Spain); 4 July 1946
(from the US). National holiday: Independence Day, 12 June (1898); note - 12 June 1898 was
date of declaration of independence from Spain; 4 July 1946 was date of independence from the
US.
 In February 1987, the Philippines adopted a new constitution that instituted the presidential-style
republican form of democracy, which resembles the U.S. model much more than the European
parliamentary system. One key difference between the Philippine and U.S. systems is that the
Philippines is a unitary republic, whereas the United States is a federal republic, with significant
powers reserved for the states. In the Philippines, by contrast, the national government is not
challenged by local authority. The ratification of the 1987 constitution—the fourth in the nation’s
history—by national referendum signaled the country’s return to democracy following the
autocratic rule of Fernando Marcos (1965–86). Politics in the Philippines is somewhat
tumultuous. In February 2006, the president declared a state of emergency after quashing the
attempted coup staged by the political opposition. [Source: Library of Congress, 2006]
 Filipinos are a freedom-loving people, having waged two peaceful, bloodless revolutions against
what were perceived as corrupt regimes. The Philippines is a vibrant democracy, as evidenced
by 12 English national newspapers, 7 national television stations, hundreds of cable TV stations,
and 2,000 radio stations. [Source: Philippines Department of Tourism]
 Administrative divisions: 80 provinces and 39 chartered cities: provinces: Abra, Agusan del
Norte, Agusan del Sur, Aklan, Albay, Antique, Apayao, Aurora, Basilan, Bataan, Batanes,
Batangas, Biliran, Benguet, Bohol, Bukidnon, Bulacan, Cagayan, Camarines Norte, Camarines
Sur, Camiguin, Capiz, Catanduanes, Cavite, Cebu, Compostela, Davao del Norte, Davao del Sur,
Davao Oriental, Dinagat Islands, Eastern Samar, Guimaras, Ifugao, Ilocos Norte, Ilocos Sur,
Iloilo, Isabela, Kalinga, Laguna, Lanao del Norte, Lanao del Sur, La Union, Leyte, Maguindanao,
Marinduque, Masbate, Mindoro Occidental, Mindoro Oriental, Misamis Occidental, Misamis
Oriental, Mountain Province, Negros Occidental, Negros Oriental, North Cotabato, Northern
Samar, Nueva Ecija, Nueva Vizcaya, Palawan, Pampanga, Pangasinan, Quezon, Quirino, Rizal,
Romblon, Samar, Sarangani, Siquijor, Sorsogon, South Cotabato, Southern Leyte, Sultan
Kudarat, Sulu, Surigao del Norte, Surigao del Sur, Tarlac, Tawi-Tawi, Zambales, Zamboanga del
Norte, Zamboanga del Sur, Zamboanga Sibugay. Chartered cities: Angeles, Antipolo, Bacolod,
Baguio, Butuan, Cagayan de Oro, Caloocan, Cebu, Cotabato, Dagupan, Davao, General Santos,
Iligan, Iloilo, Lapu-Lapu, Las Pinas, Lucena, Makati, Malabon, Mandaluyong, Mandaue, Manila,
Marikina, Muntinlupa, Naga, Navotas, Olongapo, Ormoc, Paranaque, Pasay, Pasig, Puerto
Princesa, Quezon, San Juan, Santiago, Tacloban, Taguig, Valenzuela, Zamboanga (2012)
[Source: CIA World Factbook]

Flag and Symbols of the Philippines

 Flag: The flag of the Philippines has two equal horizontal bands of blue (top) and red with a
white equilateral triangle based on the hoist side; in the center of the triangle is a yellow sun with
eight primary rays (each containing three individual rays), and in each corner of the triangle is a
small yellow five-pointed star. Blue stands for peace and justice, red symbolizes courage, the
white equal-sided triangle represents equality; the rays recall the first eight provinces that sought
independence from Spain, while the stars represent the three major geographical divisions of the
country: Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao; the design of the flag dates to 1897.
 The sun in the flag represents liberty. The flag was carried in the rebellion against Spain in 1896,
adopted in 1920 and became the national emblem in 1946. In time of war it is flown upside down
with the red band at the top. Flag ceremonies take place once a week at all governmental offices.
Schools have a flag ceremony each morning. All traffic stops while the flag is being honored.
 National symbols have been emphasized since independence to create a sense of nationhood.
The Philippine eagle, the second largest eagle in the world, is the national bird. Doctor Jose Rizal
is the national hero. Rizal streets and statues of Rizal are found in most towns and cities. Several
municipalities are named for Rizal. The national anthem is sung, a national pledge is recited in
Filipino, and the provincial hymn is sung. [Source: everyculture.com]
 National anthem: "Lupang Hinirang" (Chosen Land): lyrics/music: Jose PALMA (revised by
Felipe Padilla de Leon)/Julian Felipe. The music was adopted 1898, original Spanish lyrics
adopted 1899, Filipino (Tagalog) lyrics adopted 1956; although the original lyrics were written in
Spanish, later English and Filipino versions were created; today, only the Filipino version is used.

Philippines Democracy
 The Philippines, Taiwan, Thailand and South Korea have relatively free-wheeling democracies.
The Philippines government has been described as a corrupt democracy. Candidates are
routinely heckled and jeered. Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew once said the Philippines needs more
discipline and less democracy.
 On democracy in the Philippines at time when the government was stymied by street protests
and legislatie gridlock, Seth Mydans wrote in the New York Times, ““Pure democracy" is what
some people are calling it — massed, peaceful crowds of outraged citizens rising up, with cheers
and chants and thrilling courage, to force an abusive leader from his perch on power. It happened
in the Philippines in 1986 with the ouster of Fredinand E. Marcos, when it gained the nickname
people power. But popular revolts like this can create new problems of their own. It is a risky thing
to break the rules, even in the best of causes. Precedent is powerful, as the Philippines have
since discovered, and rule-breaking can be tempting when the democratic process bogs down.
[Source: Seth Mydans, New York Times, January 7, 2004 /*/]
 “As in the Philippines, a disenfranchised elite may fight back to hold on to influence and wealth.
The public, feeling empowered, may seek to repeat its role in overriding the government. The
military, which has the final say in any undemocratic shift in power, becomes more dangerous. In
the Philippines, the military played a comparable role in forcing Mr. Marcos from office, and the
country has remained a jittery place ever since, subject to continuing coup threats, coup rumors
and coup attempts. There have also been a "people power 2" and a "people power 3" in the
Philippines, both in 2001. One of these forced out an unpopular but democratically elected
president, Joseph Estrada, when a Senate impeachment process failed to remove him. /*/
 “The democratic system had let them down, Filipinos said, and needed a course correction.
Again, it was the generals who had the final word, and Mr. Estrada's successor, Gloria
Macapagal Arroyo, has been dogged by a restive military and by angry supporters of Mr.
Estrada. "We've had problems with legitimacy here since Edsa 1," said a political scientist, Alex
Magno, speaking by telephone from Manila and using the local name for the uprising in 1986.
"Every group thinks it can speak for the people by mounting a mutiny or mounting a riot." /*/
 “If democracy is defined simply as an exercise of public will, people power might indeed be
called its purest form, like those talent shows in which the winner is determined by a meter
registering the volume of applause. It could also be called — as it has been by those on the
losing end — mob rule or anarchy or coup. /*/

After Marcos, Little Stability for Philippines

 Reporting from Batac. Marcos’s hometown,Alan Sipress wrote in the Washington Post, “Two
decades after President Ferdinand Marcos was chased from power, he still draws the faithful and
the curious to this farming town in the northernmost Philippines. Displayed in an adobe
mausoleum, his lavishly waxed corpse lies in a family tribute, bedecked in military medals and
surrounded by faux flowers while Gregorian chants echo softly. The "People Power" movement
that forced Marcos into exile ushered in a period of sustained political turmoil — repeated coup
attempts, a popular uprising that toppled another president and continuing efforts to impeach the
current president, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. Now, many Filipinos declare East Asia's oldest
democracy a failure. [Source: Alan Sipress, Washington Post, February 25, 2006 \+/]
 “Without parties that command loyalty from their members, politicians race to the side of popular
leaders, then betray them at the sign of weakness. Moreover, ordinary Filipinos have little way to
channel their interests through the electoral system. This explains why crowds repeatedly flood
into the streets to demand change, as they did in ousting President Joseph Estrada five years
ago. Politics are frantic, with civic groups, research institutes and TV talk shows competing in a
national shout-fest. But the ballast of a modern political system, a professional civil service, is
lacking, and the feeble bureaucracy is easily buffeted by electoral turbulence. \+/
 "The lack of political institutions has made Philippine politics less stable than other countries,"
Felipe Miranda, a pollster and political scientist at the University of the Philippines, told the
Washington Post. "Disillusionment has come about because there has been a betrayal of
democratic elections. The majority of people would say democracy has largely failed." \+/

The U.S. to Blame for Philippine Government Problems?

 Alan Sipress wrote in the Washington Post, “The blame, Philippine analysts say, rests with the
country's political system — first put in place by the United States during four decades of colonial
rule — and the family dynasties it allowed to cement their power. Today, Philippine democracy is
little more than a ruthless contest among rival clans with such names as Aquino, Arroyo and
Marcos. Political parties are largely irrelevant, and most Filipinos are relegated to the role of
spectators. The cost to the economy has been tremendous. The perpetual political crisis has
scared off investment, both domestic and foreign, while national leaders have often been too
preoccupied with their own survival to pursue long-term strategies of development. "In theory, it's
American-style politics because we have a Xeroxed system," said Imee Marcos, the former
president's daughter, a three-term member of Congress who personifies the dynastic system.
"But democratic processes don't work the way they're meant to," she added. "It's ties of kinship
and blood relations." [Source: Alan Sipress, Washington Post, February 25, 2006 \+/]
 “The United States wrested control of the Philippines from Spain in 1898 and soon created a
national assembly modeled on the U.S. Congress, with representatives elected from single-
member districts. With suffrage initially limited to literate property owners, the new system
allowed landed families in each district to monopolize local power. The clans used their access to
public money, loans and patronage to consolidate their position. Political office became a family
heirloom to be handed down. \+/
 “Nor was it only in politics that U.S. colonial rulers sought to reinvent the Philippines in their own
image. Hundreds of American educators streamed into the archipelago, setting up the public-
school system and establishing English as the language of instruction. In the ensuing decades,
Philippine culture has echoed America's. Radio stations long played nothing but American music.
Filipinos play basketball instead of soccer, rush home early from work to watch "American Idol"
and are passionate about U.S.-style beauty pageants. \+/
 “But even as the Philippines came increasingly to resemble the United States, the electoral
system failed to deliver American success. Today, about two-thirds of the members of the House
of Representatives are from dynastic families, according to a recent study by the Philippine
Center for Investigative Journalism. \+/

Political Development in the Philippines

 In 1912, the American Cornélis De Witt Willcox wrote in “The Head Hunters of Northern Luzon”:
“No one will pretend that the Filipinos have had any political training. Before the arrival of the
Spaniards, only 350 years ago, they were all uncivilized. Many of them are still semi-savages;
others are savages pure and simple. These facts are indisputable. If, then, we turn to history for
assistance, we can not find a single instance of any real political evolution in any of the various
divisions of the inhabitants of the Archipelago. The exception furnished by the debased
Mohammedan sultanates of the great Island of Mindanao is only apparent. The germ of fruitful
growth is everywhere missing. Now, the Spaniards assuredly took no steps to teach their new
subjects the art and science of government; there was every reason, from their point of view, why
they should not teach this art and science. [Source:“The Head Hunters of Northern Luzon” by
Cornélis De Witt Willcox, Lieutenant-Colonel U.S. Army, Professor United States Military
Academy, 1912 <>]
 “On the other hand, our own course has been totally different. We have lost no time in putting
political power into the hands of the natives, so that to-day, after fourteen years’ possession,
municipal and provincial government are almost wholly native. To crown all, we have given the
Filipinos an elective legislature, an Assembly, all the members of which are native. Students of
the subject at first hand, impartial observers on the spot, declare freely that we have gone much
too fast, and that we have granted a measure of political administration and government beyond
the native power of assimilation and digestion. <>
 “It is not without significance that it was these same Tagálogs who organized in the past the chief
insurrections against the domination of Spain, principally, as is well known, because of the
misrule of the friars. It is also a fact that the farther one removes from Manila the feebler becomes
the cry for independence. If we consider the condition of the loudest supporters of the movement,
we find them all, or nearly all, to be politicians, políticos. Some of these politicians are not
Tagálogs—for example, Señor Osmeña, the Speaker of the Assembly, is a Visayan; so that it
would perhaps be more accurate to say of the entire propaganda that it is an affair of the
politicians, supported chiefly by Tagálogs.
 “The Filipino is, on the one hand, hospitable, courageous, fond of music, show, and display; and,
on the other, indolent, superstitious, dishonest, and addicted to gambling. One quality,
imitativeness, is possibly neutral. It would appear that his virtues do not especially look toward
thrift—i.e., economic independence—and that his defects positively look the other way. If the
witnesses testifying be challenged on the score of incompetency. The picture may be overdrawn;
but it is a Filipino picture, drawn by a Filipino hand. Let us now permit, the native press to speak
again on the subject engaging our attention. Thus Vanguardia a bitter anti-American sheet,
arraigns its wealthy fellow-countrymen for lack of initiative and fondness of routine. It accuses
them of a willingness to invest in city property, to deposit money in banks, “to make loans at
usurious rates, in which they take advantage of the urgent and pressing necessities of their
countrymen,” but of unwillingness “to engage in agriculture, marine or industrial enterprise”; and
says they are “generally lacking in the spirit of progression.” According to another native
newspaper, the vice of gambling has infected all classes of society, men and women alike, rich
and poor, young and old.” <>

Philippines Constitution
 Constitution: There have been several previous constitutions; The latest was ratified under the
Aquino government on February 2, 1987, and became effective on February 11, 1987 (2013).
The first constitution, based on the United States Constitution, was written in 1935 and amended
in 1940 and 1946. When President Marcos declared martial law in 1972, that constitution was
replaced by another one providing for a head of state, a prime minister, and a unicameral
legislature. Marcos’s constitution declared the that Marcos would remain the President and Prime
Minster indefinitely and rule over a rubber-stamp parliament. It gave the president power to
dissolve the legislature, appoint the prime minister, and declare himself prime minister. The new
constitution was approved in a national referendum in 1987 was similar to the 1935 constitution
but included term limitations of Senators, Congressmen and the President. [Sources:
everyculture.com, CIA World Factbook, Library of Congress]
 The Philippines has a long history of democratic constitutional development. The Malolos
Constitution of 1898-99 reflected the aspirations of educated Filipinos to create a polity as
enlightened as any in the world. That first constitution was modeled on those of France, Belgium,
and some of the South American republics. Powers were divided, but the legislature was
supreme. A bill of rights guaranteed individual liberties. The church was separated from the state,
but this provision was included only after a long debate and passed only by a single vote. The
Malolos Constitution was in effect only briefly; United States troops soon installed a colonial
government, which remained in effect until the establishment of the Philippine Commonwealth in
1935. *
 The 1935 constitution, drawn up under the terms of the Tydings-McDuffie Act, which created the
Philippine Commonwealth, also served as a basis for an independent Philippine government from
1946 until 1973. The framers of the Commonwealth Constitution were not completely free to
choose any type of government they wanted, since their work had to be approved by United
States president Franklin D. Roosevelt, but as many were legal scholars familiar with American
constitutional law, they produced a document strongly modeled on the United States Constitution.
In fact, the 1935 constitution differed from the United States document in only two important
respects: Government was unitary rather than federal, local governments being subject to
general supervision by the president, and the president could declare an emergency and
temporarily exercise near-dictatorial power. This latter provision was used by Marcos after
September 1972, when he declared martial law. *
 The 1935 constitution seemed to serve the nation well. It gave the Philippines twenty-six years of
stable, constitutional government during a period when a number of other Asian states were
succumbing to military dictatorship or communist revolution. By the late 1960s, however, many
Filipinos came to believe that the constitution only provided a democratic political cloak for a
profoundly oligarchic society. A constitutional convention was called to rewrite the basic law of
the land. *
 The delegates selected to rewrite the constitution hoped to retain its democratic essence while
deleting parts deemed to be unsuitable relics of the colonial past. They hoped to produce a
genuinely Filipino document. But before their work could be completed, Marcos declared martial
law and manipulated the constitutional convention to serve his purposes. The 1973 constitution
was a deviation from the Philippines' commitment to democratic ideals. Marcos abolished
Congress and ruled by presidential decree from September 1972 until 1978, when a
parliamentary government with a legislature called the National Assembly replaced the
presidential system. But Marcos exercised all the powers of president under the old system plus
the powers of prime minister under the new system. When Marcos was driven from office in
1986, the 1973 constitution also was jettisoned. *