University of the Philippines Open University

Faculty of Management and Development Studies

Master of Management Program

Roldan A. Talaugon June 5, 2021

PM 208 PAS Faculty-in-Charge: MSBaylon

Integrating Activity

Issue Paper
 ETHICS AND ACCOUNTABILITY

IN THE PHILIPPINE ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM:

AN ISSUE PAPER

I. ISSUE OR PROBLEM AND THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY

For many years now and after several presidential administrations that have

passed, it appears that ethics and accountability as well as the integrity and

productivity in the Philippine Administrative System (PAS) was marred with

cancerous issues such as graft and corruption, inefficiency, lack of transparency,

and lack of incentives, among others. Unfortunately, these problems have entered

into a state of normalcy in our country’s bureaucracy and public administration.

It is important to delve into this already seemingly normal, degrading, and

critical issue in order to understand how it started and its effect on the famous phrase

“public office is a public trust” and in the field of good governance. This paper will

specifically look into the root causes of the issues; its nature, extent, and magnitude;

the effects on the effective and responsive functioning of the PAS; its outcomes and

impact to the government or the country; the various reforms instituted by the

government; the success and effectiveness of the reforms and what made them

successful or unsuccessful; and lastly, some suggestions in order to address the

problems or gaps in the enforcement and implementation of those reforms.

Before going further into the issue, it is important to lay down the acceptable

definitions or concept of ethics and accountability in the field of public administration.

Duque (2104) mentioned in his speech in reference to the academic journal of the

University of Sta. Clara, Ethics “refers to well-founded standards of right and wrong
that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits

to society, fairness, or specific virtue.” The primary guide for promoting the highest

standards of ethics in public service in the Philippines is the Republic Act No. 6713 or

the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees.

Accountability on the other hand “refers to the legal and reporting framework,

organizational structure, strategy, procedures, and actions to help ensure that any

organizations that use public money and make decisions that affect people's lives can

be held responsible for their actions” (Controller and Auditor-General, 2001).

Furthermore, Section 1, Article XI of the 1987 Philippine Constitution states that

“Public office is a public trust. Public officers and employees must, at all times, be

accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and

efficiency; act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.” With no less than

the 1987 Philippine Constitution and RA 6713 being primary guides for promoting and

enforcing ethics and accountability in the PAS, it can be understood that we truly

emphasize its importance in public service. The question is what happened and where

have we gone wrong towards strictly achieving and implementing such concepts and

how can we address or improve on it towards having an effective and efficient public

service delivery.

II. ROOT CAUSE/S

We as Filipinos are known to take so much pride on our deeply rooted values,

traits, and culture as our distinct identity and guiding principles in our daily lives and

interaction especially in maintaining close ties with our immediate family members and

other people in the community whom we develop special ties with. However, as
positive as these culture and values are towards preserving our identity and

interpersonal relationships with other people, these are also the very root cause of our

problems in promoting and enforcing ethics and accountability in the public service as

being challenged by widespread graft and corruption, lack of transparency, and

inefficiency.

San Juan (2014) mentioned in her article the “importance of culture in

understanding politics and the government, especially when we decry of reforms made

in our public organizations.” She further elaborated that by looking and understanding

our values and culture we could then relate it towards understanding our present

problems and thereby be able to form concrete solutions to address issues in our PAS,

“for it is in understanding the norms, the value and belief systems underlying the

behavior of people that we begin to see how we can significantly reform the system to

make it work for the good of everyone.” As mentioned in her article, authors Varela

(1996), Andres and Ilada-Andres (1987) identified three main traits or values that

emphasizes our behavior and daily interaction and decision-making: Personalism,

Familism, and Particularism or Popularism.

“Personalism has to do with the degree of emphasis Filipinos give to

interpersonal relations or to face-to-face encounters. Familism emphasizes the

welfare and interest of the family over the welfare and interest of the community. The

pervasive influence of the family on individual and group behavior, as reinforced by

personalistic orientation, gives rise to particularism or popularism” (Varela, 1996,

and Andres and Ilada-Andres,1987 in San Juan, 2014). From these traits alone and

their corresponding explanation or description, we can immediately and undeniably

relate much and somehow derive an understanding on why we struggle so much in

enforcing ethics and accountability as well as integrity and productivity in the public

service.

Those three traits form the core values from where other cultural values which

are far more familiar to us: “pakikisama, hiya, utang na loob, amor propio, and

delicadeza” (Varela, 1996 in San Juan, 2014). Most important to highlight are that

these traits were already inculcated to us even before Spanish and American

colonization. These supporting traits may seem positive in maintaining interpersonal

relationship but have negative implications when brought into practice in the field of

public administration. Additionally, these traits were further reinforced by the negative

practices introduced especially in the Spanish colonization, which was characterized

by graft and corruption, patronage than merit, abuse of power, incompetence, and

inefficiency towards public service.

III. NATURE, EXTENT, AND MAGNITUDE

Majority of public administrative and disciplinary cases in the government

basically starts from issues on the failure of upholding ethical standards among public

officials and employees. As stated, it has already very rampant and in fact seem to

have entered a state of normalcy.

Going back on our historical background, the root cause of our issues on ethics

and accountability are deeply rooted basically on our Filipino cultural traits and values

which were already intrinsic even in the pre-colonial periods. It was then in the

Spanish colonization where it was reinforced and practiced negatively in a higher level

with the introduction of early public administration. In the article of Calina and Brillantes

(2018), they noted that Dr. Jose Rizal have made mention of the flaws especially on
bribery, graft and corruption of the working administrative system during the Spanish

period. More so, when the Americans came in, they confirmed the rampant corruption

and the inefficiency of the governance as started by the Spanish occupation. As also

cited in their article for the report of the Philippine Commission in 1956, it was observed

that governmental services in the Spanish period were “not well developed,” that the

Spanish government was “exploitative,” “did not even achieve the basic objective of

good government in that it was not able to maintain peace and order,” and did not

sustain a “satisfactory level in the administration of justice.”

As years pass by and the growth of global, environmental, and societal

demands continue to rise and become more and more complex, many different

government agencies, offices, and units continue to increase as well. From the

establishment of the Spanish government starting with few administrative agencies or

offices such as the Office of the Governor General, Departments of Army and Navy,

Royal Audiencia, Department of Finance, and the Directorate General of Civil

Administration, to a present total of 23 national government agencies (NGAs), other

than the different regular and constitutional commissions, government-owned and

controlled corporations (GOCCs), local government units (LGUs), and government ad

hoc or task forces. With this increase, so is the spreading of ethical and accountability

issues among the different organizations. As mentioned in the article of the then Chair

of the House Committee on Civil Service and Professional Regulations,

Representative Antonio V. Cuenco of Cebu, pointing the Department of Foreign Affairs

as an example, “It is riddled with employees who do nothing but polish their fingernails,

engage in telebabad, talk of Marimar, or ruminate lotto numbers. But if you give P100

as the regulation says, your passport will be approved in one day” (Calina and
Brillantes, 2018). And this simple yet malignant practice is suspected to be the same

with other government organizations.

In 1998, the World Bank created the Worldwide Governance Indicators which

our country has also been using as reference for monitoring and institutionalizing

future reforms and efforts to improve public service, administration, and governance.

It gives data with regard to the six broad dimensions of governance. Among the six

indicators, three of which are considered under the auspices of ethics and

accountability which were also used in one of the pillars of the Philippine

Development Plan 2017-2022 by the Duterte administration, the pillar on Enhancing

the Social Fabric “Malasakit” specifically on the aim to Ensure People-Centered,

Clean, and Efficient Governance. The three indicators mentioned are the Voice and

Accountability, Government Effectiveness, and Control of Corruption (PDP

2017-2022).

Voice and Accountability captures perceptions of the extent to which a

country's citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as

freedom of expression, freedom of association, and a free media. Government

Effectiveness, on the other hand, captures perceptions of the quality of public

services, the quality of the civil service and the degree of its independence from

political pressures, the quality of policy formulation and implementation, and the

credibility of the government's commitment to such policies. While Control of

Corruption captures perceptions of the extent to which public power is exercised for

private gain, including both petty and grand forms of corruption, as well as "capture"

of the state by elites and private interests (WGI, n.d.).

Table 1. Philippines’ Performance in the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) as
Compared with Selected ASEAN Countries, 1998-2019.

Source: World Bank (WB)

It must be noted that data started with 1998 since it was on that year when the

WGI was established and first used. The following years shown in the table represents

the end of term of each presidential administration, except for 2001 wherein there was

no available data thus using the 2002 figures, to gauge how have their administrations

performed with regard to the three indicators relating to ethics and accountability.

Being a democratic government and where democracy has even been overly practiced

and thereby enhancing citizen’s participation, we rank higher among other selected

ASEAN countries. However, we rank low and even taking the last ranking in

Government Effectiveness and Control of Corruption due to various issues especially

on the Priority Development Assistance Fund scam in 2015 (PDP 2017-2022).

IV. EFFECT ON THE EFFECTIVE AND RESPONSIVE FUNCTIONING OF THE

PHILIPPINE ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM (PAS)

Graft and Corruption, being the most extensive and known unethical practice in

the administrative system, creates an image of distrust and doubt of the public towards
the efficiency on the effective and responsive functioning of the PAS. With the issues

on ethical standards and accountability of public officials and employees, much of the

financial resources and time are being put to waste. All the issues combined, no matter

how little they may seem, contributes to the overall inefficiency of the government thus

slowing economic growth and development which in turn greatly degrades the quality

of public service delivery.

The cycle of clientelism, patronage, and nepotism which is also very evident in

our country’s governance and administration are also in a way breeding grounds or

causes for corruption. Incompetent individuals are being prioritized or placed into

public positions for the sake of close familial ties or political relationship in return for

any favors to be reaped upon on an appropriate time. This promotes an environment

of unfairness, dishonesty, and inequity.

Low or unstandardized salaries on the other hand will also lead to public

officials engaging on secret private businesses, or worst, delay public services while

waiting for a generous amount of bribe spanning from simple and small-scale

applications or requests to the much larger processes involving different companies,

corporations, and other organizations.

With the abovementioned issues, conflicts also arise which in turn creates

dysfunction of the public administration. As mentioned by Ghsoub (2018), “conflicts

present incidents provoked by existing deviations between the means, methods and

attitudes of actions regarding a phenomenon which represents the object of analysis.

Organizational conflicts can be observed as disputes that occur when values, goals or

interests of individuals contradict each other... Dysfunctions are accompanied by

tension and their consequences consist of animosity, low yield, stress, absenteeism,

frustration, aggressiveness, fear, discontent and resentments.”

V. OUTCOMES OR IMPACT TO THE PAS AND THE WHOLE

GOVERNMENT/COUNTRY

The effects of the issues on ethics and accountability among public officials

creates distrust and discontent of the public towards government officials and public

servants. With these issues seen as a daily and normal activity already, trust is being

questioned by the public as to where their taxes really go. Erosion of democratic

system and principles are then being felt and as a result, the public withdraw their

participation in government decision-making with the thought that no matter how they

raise their issues and concerns, it will still not be answered for as long as favoritism

and corruption exist in the government.

Additionally, Ghsoub (2018) also stated in his article that “corruption may

dissolve the significant strength of political legitimacy, which most governments seek

to preserve and build on. Due to corruption and abuse of power, policymakers

ultimately fail in their goal to predict events in the long term. And ultimately, due to

corruption in public administration, the state may fail and be powerless of providing

even basic services such as public order for the society in any meaningful form.

Corruption leads to the failure of the state to deal with fundamental, political, and

governance issues such as the public budget and appointment of significant public

officials.”

VI. REFORMS INSTITUTED BY THE GOVERNMENT

Until the end of the Spanish occupation of the Philippines, public

administrations was in a very bad shape noting especially with the spoils of Spanish
governance in the Philippines such as nepotism, patronage, sponsorship, familism,

recruitment through purchase of public positions, no standard salary, engaging on

private businesses or getting commission from fees and charges collected,

incompetence and inefficiency, abuse of power, no accountability, and widespread

graft and corruption. As mentioned earlier, these problems reinforced our innate

cultural traits which had negative implications when practiced in the government. To

improve the quality of public service and the administrative system in our country,

many reforms and initiatives were created and put into law.

Establishment of the Civil Service Commission (CSC)

After many developments and reforms in the civil service since its introduction

by the Americans in 1900, it was finally enacted through Republic Act 2260, otherwise

known as the Civil Service Law, thereby legally and formally establishing of the Civil

Service Commission and was conferred with the status of a department. In the 1987

Constitution, the Commission was then mandated “to promote morale, efficiency,

integrity, responsiveness, progressiveness, and courtesy in the Civil Service”

(CSC, n.d.).

Duque (2014) and Aranas (2016) elaborated the different human resource

(HR) initiatives through awards and programs of the CSC to promote the principles

of ethics, integrity, and accountability into the public service and administration and

were “meant to help both individual and organization reach their maximum potential”:

a. Program to Institutionalize Meritocracy and Excellence in Human

Resource Management (PRIME-HRM) - aims to upgrade the maturity level of HR

systems in government agencies to make them at par with global HR standards.

 b. Competency - Based Recruitment and Qualification System

(CBRQS) - gauges both applicants and employees not just on the basis of their

education, experience, training, and eligibility, but on a set of required competencies

as well.

c. Leadership and Coaching Program (LCP) - adopt the coaching

approach to help our human resource get over hurdles and challenges in their career.

d. Competency - Based Learning and Development Program (CBLDP)

- directly addresses the problem of competency gaps through trainings and HR

interventions, preparing individuals as their agencies upgrade their maturity level.

e. Strategic Performance Management System (SPMS) – a

performance evaluation system that links individual performance to organizational

performance.

f. Presidential Lingkod Bayan Award - conferred by the President to an

individual for consistent and dedicated performance which made significant impact to

the public and the country as a whole.

g. CSC Pag-asa Award - granted to a group of individuals or a team who

demonstrated outstanding teamwork and cooperation which resulted in better delivery

of public service, improved the lives of clients or beneficiaries, or instituted efficiency

and economy in government operations.

h. Alay sa Bayan Induction Program - This aims to focus and enhance

the energies and commitment of new employees as they assume their new roles as

government employees and prepare them for different ethical dilemmas that they may

face.

i. Values Orientation Workshop - designed to inculcate appropriate

norms and conduct becoming of government employees.

 j. Gabay ng Paglilingkod - a program for career executives as a

capability building program that provides a forum for discussion on values and

principles of public ethics and accountability among government managers.

k. Training on public sector ethics and accountability, which is being

developed under the auspices of the United Nations Development Programme -

PARAGON Regional Governance Reform Program. The framework that is being

pursued for this training course basically focuses on the individual.

Creation of Oversight Institutions

Three oversight institutions were created as mandated by the Constitution: the

Civil Service Commission, Office of the Ombudsman, and the Commission on

Audit.

The Civil Service Commission, as mentioned above, is the central personnel

agency of the government. The Office of the Ombudsman acts as a prosecutor against

those charged with the violation of RAs 3019, 6713, and the law against ill-gotten

wealth, among others, and mandated to investigate and prosecute the criminal liability

of public officials and employees involved in graft and corruption. Lastly, the

Commission on Audit is responsible for ensuring legal and proper disbursement of

public funds and preventing irregular, unnecessary, or extravagant expenditures or

usage of public funds (CSC, 2000).

RA No. 6713 or the "Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public

Officials and Employees"

Section 2 of RA No. 6713 aimed “to promote a high standard of ethics in

public service. Public officials and employees shall at all times be accountable
to the people and shall discharge their duties with utmost responsibility,

integrity, competence, and loyalty, act with patriotism.” Section 4 clearly outlines

the eight Norms of Conduct of Public Officials and Employees: Commitment to

Public Interest, Professionalism, Justness and Sincerity, Political Neutrality,

Responsiveness to the Public, Nationalism and Patriotism, Commitment to

Democracy, and Simple Living.

Additionally, specific duties and responsibilities for all public officials and

employees was also established in this act wherein they will be obliged to perform or

follow. These are:

a. To act promptly on letters and requests within 15 working days from

receipt and reply must contain action taken on the said request;

b. For all government agencies and government-owned or controlled

corporations (GOCCs) to submit annual performance reports within 45 working

days from the end of the year which shall be open and available to the public;

c. Process documents and papers expeditiously and must contain, as

far as practicable, not more that three signatories therein;

d. Act immediately on the public's personal transactions at all times;

and

e. Make documents accessible to the public within reasonable working

hours.

More so, RA 6713 states the establishment of a System of Incentives and

Rewards in all branches and agencies of the government especially due recognition

to those deserving public officials and employees of outstanding merit. Prohibited

acts and transactions for public servants were also outlined such as financial and

material interest; outside employment and other activities related such as private
practice unless authorized; disclosure and/or misuse of confidential information; and

solicitation of acceptance of gifts. It is also in this Act where the Statement of Assets,

Liabilities, and Net Worth, and Financial Disclosure of Business Interests and

Financial Connections must be complied and made available for inspection.

RA No. 11032 or the “Ease of Doing Business and Efficient Government

Service Delivery Act of 2017”

RA No. 11032 is a revision or amendment of the RA 9485 or Anti-Red Tape Act

(ARTA) of 2007. It is still aimed “to promote integrity, accountability, proper

management of public affairs and public property as well as to establish

effective practices aimed at the prevention of graft and corruption in

government.” Specific additions to the Act are the inclusion of overseas government

instrumentalities such as consular offices and Philippine embassies; the Zero-

Contact policy which aims to reduce bribery and corruption in frontline public

transactions during application and processing. To further enforce such reform, a web-

based application and processing system will be established to serve as the point

of contact or interaction between government offices and the public. This also features

bigger accountability for receiving officers and shorter processing times for any

transaction or application into three, seven, and twenty working days for transactions

classified as simple, complex, and requests involving activities which could be a threat

to public health, safety, morals, policy, or a highly technical application, respectively.

Among the parts retained from the ARTA are the Reengineering of systems

and procedures; Setting up respective service standards known as the Citizen’s

Charter; Accountability of the heads of offices and agencies; Accessibility of frontline

services; Automatic extension of permits and licenses; and the Report Card Survey.
VII. EFFECTIVENESS AND SUCCESS OF THE REFORMS AND ITS GAPS

With the numerous reforms through laws and programs instituted by the

government and the different oversight institutions such as the CSC, it can be

positively concluded that in a better degree, these are being followed or implemented.

This can be seen with the different political or public officials who were charged and

tried with different anomalies in public service as broadcasted in media outlets, aside

from those numerous actual cases filed before the different oversight committees

especially in the Office of the Ombudsman. However, in the interest of personal gains

and favors, some public servants seem to find a way to draw technicalities or

circumvent around the established laws especially those who have greater political or

financial connections. This mindset generally sums up all the gaps or problems among

the reforms instituted.

VIII. SUGGESTIONS TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM AND GAPS ON THE

REFORMS

As Aranas (2016) mentioned, what is needed to address issues on ethics and

accountability for public officials and employees are the combination and harmonious

collaboration of different legal infrastructures as guided by our Constitution, political

commitment through policy guidance and pronouncements, oversight institutions

and their respective programs and initiatives as mandated by the Constitution, and the

ethical and accountability mechanisms and infrastructures in the personal or

individual level and more importantly to all levels of the community and the

organization or the whole Philippine Administrative System.

 There is no question that we have enough legal and ethical infrastructure as

well as the oversight institutions to implement and guide as towards solving the issues

on ethics and accountability. What we need is true and purposeful political

commitment towards enforcing the much-needed reforms and changes for a better

public service delivery and governance. Changes are needed to be realized and done

first on our own behavior, mindsets, and attitudes addressing the negative cultural

traits and values when practiced in the field of public administration. The media being

a primary and strong tool in publicizing government efforts as well as issues on

inefficiency and graft and corruption must maintain a sense of impartiality and fairness,

going away with political affiliations or connections. This takes a collaborated and

mutual effort from the citizens, private and public individuals and organizations, and

the whole country to change the whole system and achieve sincere and true

development in all aspects of government, whether economic, social, or political.

References:

Aranas, A. G. L. (2016). Bureaucracy on Trail: Ethical Standards for Public Officials

and Employees. International Journal of Public Administration and Management
Research. ISSN: 2350-2231. Retrieved from
https://www.journalcra.com/article/bureaucracy-trail-ethical-standards-public-officials-
and-employees. Accessed: June 1, 2021.

Berman, E. M. (2011). Public Administration in Southeast Asia: Thailand, Philippines,

Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Macao. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press – Taylor and Francis
Group. Retrieved from http://blancopeck.net/Public-Administration-in-Southeast-
Asia.pdf. Accessed: June 4, 2021.

Brillantes, A. B. and Fernandez, M. T. (2011). Restoring Trust and Building Integrity

in Government: Issues and Concerns in the Philippines and Areas for Reform. 2nd
Annual International Conference of the Asian Association for Public Administration.
International Public Management Review. Retrieved from
https://journals.sfu.ca/ipmr/index.php/ipmr/article/viewFile/102/102.
Accessed: June 2, 2021.

Calina, L. and Brillantes, A. (2018). An Assessment of Governmental Services in the

Philippines from Spanish to Contemporary Times. 2018 Annual Conference of Asian
Association for Public Administration. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325724839_An_Assessment_Of_Governm
ental_Services_In_The_Philippines_From_Spanish_To_Contemporary_Times.
Accessed: June 1, 2021.

Civil Service Commission Historical Highlights. Retrieved from

http://www.csc.gov.ph/beta/about/historical-highlights. Accessed: June 4, 2021.

Controller and Auditor-General. (2016). Public Sector Accountability Through Raising

Concerns. New Zealand: Wellington. ISBN 978-0-478-44233-5. Retrieved from
https://oag.parliament.nz/2016/accountability/part2.htm. Accessed: June 3, 2021.

Ghsoub, D. (2018). The Impact of Corruption on the Effectiveness of Public

Administration. Retrieved from https://www.lebarmy.gov.lb/en/content/impact-
corruption-effectiveness-public-administration. Accessed: June 5, 2021.

Republic Act No. 6713. (1989). Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
Officials and Employees. Retrieved from
https://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/docs/republicacts/Republic_Act_No_6713.pdf.
Accessed: June 3, 2021.

Republic Act No. 9485. (2007). Anti-Red Tape Act. Retrieved from
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2007/06/02/republic-act-no-9485/.
Accessed: June 3, 2021.
San Juan, M. J. S. (2014). Administrative Values in the Philippines and Their
Implications to the Efficiency of the Bureaucracy and Governance. Philippine
Governance Digest Vol. 1 Issue 2. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/8412371/Administrative_Values_in_the_Philippines_and_
their_Implications_to_the_Efficiency_of_the_Bureaucracy_and_Governance_Part_1.
Accessed: June 1, 2021.

The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. (1987). Article XI.
Accountability of Public Officers. Retrieved from
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/constitutions/the-1987-constitution-of-the-republic-
of-the-philippines/the-1987-constitution-of-the-republic-of-the-philippines-article-xi.
Accessed: June 3, 2021.

University of Texas Arlington Online. (2016). The Importance of Ethics in Public

Administration. Retrieved from https://academicpartnerships.uta.edu/articles/public-
administration/the-importance-of-ethics-in-public-administration.aspx. Accessed:
June 3, 2021.

World Bank. Worldwide Governance Indicators. Retrieved from

https://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/. Accessed: June 4, 2021.