INTRODUCTION

It is well known that several groups in the political and social spheres have been active in
advocating for the Philippines to have a federal system of government. Since the adoption of the
constitution in 1986, these calls have gained increased attention, with nearly every administration
following President Aquino proposing or being asked to present ideas for the establishment of a federal
government.

There are many justifications for federalism in the Philippines; some advocate it to encourage
autonomy, particularly in regions with significant cultural populations, such the Muslims in Mindanao.
Some propose the plan for economic and social reform, while others advocate it for improved
accountability and more effective governance. Although there are differences in the positions,
approaches, and systems put out, all of these groups agree that the Philippines needs a federal republic.

These essays will clarify federalism and its facets. It will also provide background information on
the country's existing federalization scenario and the opposing arguments for its establishment. The group
will take a stance at the conclusion of the paper.

DEFINITION

Federalism is the idea or practice of using federal principles to distribute authority among
member entities and shared institutions. In contrast to unitary states, federal political regimes contain non-
centralized, frequently constitutional, divisions of sovereignty between at least two levels, giving each
level the last say and the ability to exercise self-government in some areas. As a result, two authorities
have political obligations to citizens or are responsible for protecting their rights.

BODY

The existence of two largely independent levels of government, the central or national
government and the regional or state government, is one of the most significant characteristics of
federalism. Most states should be autonomous, and in order to maintain that autonomy, they typically
have a source of income that is independent of the national government. These two governments should
have a spectrum of powers that the other cannot intrude upon. States have the authority to enact their own
levies. Between states and the federal government, there are typically differences in the division of
authorities and authority. Another aspect of federalism emphasizes the need for written constitutions to
spell out the roles, responsibilities, authority, and jurisdiction of the two levels of government.
Consequently, a legislative framework can be used to manage the interaction between the national
government and the state government. The Supreme Court typically serves as the constitutional arbiter in
cases of disagreements between the state and federal governments, which is the third aspect of federalism.
The final feature of federalism is the existence of institutions that connect the two levels of government.
This is done to make sure that different state voices and viewpoints are taken into account when
developing policy.
 The urgent necessity to establish peace in Mindanao is where the Federalism Debate began. A
federal government has the benefit of continuing to be accessible to the populace. Political, social, and
economic issues specific to each province exist. Representatives of the provincial government are more
likely to be familiar with these issues because they are local to the populace and frequently come from the
same community. As a result, citizens have greater access to decision-makers and opportunity to
participate in local, state, and federal government. State governments are free to enact laws that cannot be
obeyed by the federal government or by any other state. As a result, federalism can be innovative and
experimental. To bring about reforms in any area of the public realm, whether it is taxation or education,
two local governments may use two alternative strategies. The comparison of these policies' outcomes can
provide a clear indication of which policy is superior and, thus, can be implemented in the future.
Additionally, federalism protects against tyranny and preserves the separation of powers. Federalism
guarantees that state governments will continue to operate independently even if one person or party gains
control of all three arms of the federal government. Finally, it strengthens state allegiances. Federalism
preserves this link by providing the states power and acting as a check on national supremacy because
many people have strong emotional ties to their native state. The division of authority between the federal
government and the states, however, has both benefits and drawbacks. Work might occasionally overlap,
which can lead to a misunderstanding of who is in charge of what. It may result in double the amount of
government and ineffective, overlapping, or conflicting policymaking across the nation. Federalism can
also result in inequity between the states and unhealthy competition and rivalry between them. This is
because there are too many elected officials with overlapping responsibilities, which can lead to over-
government and corruption. A regional administration could also rebel against the federal authority. The
integrity of the nation is threatened by both situations. Additionally, there are regional differences in
natural resources, industry, and employment prospects. As a result, wealth and income are not equally
divided. Richer states can provide their residents with more possibilities and advantages than poorer
states. State administrations may become egotistical and primarily interested in the advancement of their
own region as a result of federalism, widening the divide between rich and poor states. They have the
ability to create policies that might be harmful to other areas. For instance, pollution from a province that
actively promotes industrialisation can harm crops in a region that is completely dependent on agriculture.
Additionally, it is said that the federal system of governance is excessively expensive since more
individuals than necessary are elected to both state and federal offices. So, it is frequently said that only
rich countries can afford it.

In the preparation for a federal system in the country, the national government must start to be
more decentralized. By allowing the local governments (and later on, states) to be self-reliant, local
leaders will be trained on the different roles they will have to fulfill in a new, federal set-up. Capability-
building, and not just mere changes in structure is needed for the local governments to function
effectively. They must also be oriented to respond to community needs. By introducing federalism in the
Philippines, there are issues and concerns regarding it that has yet to be confronted. (Brillantes, 2002).
Federalism, for most people, is seen to be a solution for regional aspirations for autonomy and end war
and regional disparities, especially in Mindanao. But for the most part, some groups such as the Moros,
want a "separate nation", and not autonomy. In this case, there is a need for space to define issues
between the future federal government and the separatists, convincing them that a federal state is an
acceptable alternative .Another challenged to be faced in pushing for a federal system is the need for a
broad and participatory engagement in the deliberation process. While members of the academe, civil
society and other interests groups were engaged in pushing for reform, most of them had to "back off".
(Rodriguez, 2011) More than just pushing for federalism by stating its advantages and how it can reform
political and social institutions, there is a need to convince people on how federalism will impact their
everyday lives. Various sectors must be allowed and encouraged to participate, and time must be given to
thoroughly discuss and debate the different proposals being proposed.

CONCLUSION

Numerous ideas and initiatives to convert the Philippines from a unitary to a federal form of government
have been made since the country's new constitution was adopted in 1987. None of these initiatives have
been put to a national vote or passed with a majority. The need for federalism in the Philippines and
elsewhere can be demonstrated by looking at the literature on the subject. Federalism would guarantee
better accountability since elected officials would be more in tune with their constituents' needs. As states
choose strategies that are suited to local resources and strengths, it can promote economic growth.
Finally, a federal government can assure social and cultural growth by safeguarding and fostering
regional ambitions and cultures while still ensuring national security. . The group concluded that a federal
form of government should be introduced in the Philippines. However, we reserve giving a comment on
the form of the federal government to be established, for we believe it should be determined and debated
in a constitutional assembly or convention.