Local Government and Regional

Administration
Accountability

Accountability, principle according to which a person or institution is

responsible for a set of duties and can be required to give an account of their
fulfilment to an authority that is in a position to issue rewards or punishment. .

Accountability refers to the processes, norms, and structures that hold the
population and public officials legally responsible for their actions and that
impose sanctions if they violate the law.

THE 1987 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

ARTICLE XI

ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS

Section 1. 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.

Section 2. The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme

Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman
may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable
violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high
crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may
be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.

Section 3. (1) The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power
to initiate all cases of impeachment.
(2) A verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any Member of the
House of Representatives or by any citizen upon a resolution or endorsement
by any Member thereof, which shall be included in the Order of Business
within ten session days, and referred to the proper Committee within three
session days thereafter. The Committee, after hearing, and by a majority vote
of all its Members, shall submit its report to the House within sixty session
days from such referral, together with the corresponding resolution. The
resolution shall be calendared for consideration by the House within ten
session days from receipt thereof.
(3) A vote of at least one-third of all the Members of the House shall be
necessary either to affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles of
Impeachment of the Committee, or override its contrary resolution. The vote
of each Member shall be recorded.
(4) In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at
least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute the
Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed.
(5) No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official
more than once within a period of one year.
(6) The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of
impeachment. When sitting for that purpose, the Senators shall be on oath or
affirmation. When the President of the Philippines is on trial, the Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court shall preside, but shall not vote. No person shall be
convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the
Senate.
(7) Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal
from office and disqualification to hold any office under the Republic of the
Philippines, but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to
prosecution, trial, and punishment, according to law.
(8) The Congress shall promulgate its rules on impeachment to effectively
carry out the purpose of this section.
Section 4. The present anti-graft court known as the Sandiganbayan shall
continue to function and exercise its jurisdiction as now or hereafter may be
provided by law.

Section 5. There is hereby created the independent Office of the

Ombudsman, composed of the Ombudsman to be known as Tanodbayan,
one overall Deputy and at least one Deputy each for Luzon, Visayas, and
Mindanao. A separate Deputy for the military establishment may likewise be
appointed.

Section 6. The officials and employees of the Office of the Ombudsman, other
than the Deputies, shall be appointed by the Ombudsman, according to the
Civil Service Law.

Section 7. The existing Tanodbayan shall hereafter be known as the Office of

the Special Prosecutor. It shall continue to function and exercise its powers as
now or hereafter may be provided by law, except those conferred on the
Office of the Ombudsman created under this Constitution.

Section 8. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall be natural-born citizens of

the Philippines, and at the time of their appointment, at least forty years old, of
recognized probity and independence, and members of the Philippine Bar,
and must not have been candidates for any elective office in the immediately
preceding election. The Ombudsman must have, for ten years or more, been
a judge or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.
During their tenure, they shall be subject to the same disqualifications and
prohibitions as provided for in Section 2 of Article IX-A of this Constitution.

Section 9. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall be appointed by the

President from a list of at least six nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar
Council, and from a list of three nominees for every vacancy thereafter. Such
appointments shall require no confirmation. All vacancies shall be filled within
three months after they occur.

Section 10. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall have the rank of
Chairman and Members, respectively, of the Constitutional Commissions, and
they shall receive the same salary which shall not be decreased during their
term of office.

Section 11. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall serve for a term of seven
years without reappointment. They shall not be qualified to run for any office
in the election immediately succeeding their cessation from office.

Section 12. The Ombudsman and his Deputies, as protectors of the people,
shall act promptly on complaints filed in any form or manner against public
officials or employees of the Government, or any subdivision, agency or
instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled
corporations, and shall, in appropriate cases, notify the complainants of the
action taken and the result thereof.

Section 13. The Office of the Ombudsman shall have the following powers,
functions, and duties:
(1) Investigate on its own, or on complaint by any person, any act or omission
of any public official, employee, office or agency, when such act or omission
appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient.
(2) Direct, upon complaint or at its own instance, any public official or
employee of the Government, or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality
thereof, as well as of any government-owned or controlled corporation with
original charter, to perform and expedite any act or duty required by law, or to
stop, prevent, and correct any abuse or impropriety in the performance of
duties.
(3) Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate action against a public
official or employee at fault, and recommend his removal, suspension,
demotion, fine, censure, or prosecution, and ensure compliance therewith.
(4) Direct the officer concerned, in any appropriate case, and subject to such
limitations as may be provided by law, to furnish it with copies of documents
relating to contracts or transactions entered into by his office involving the
disbursement or use of public funds or properties, and report any irregularity
to the Commission on Audit for appropriate action.
(5) Request any government agency for assistance and information
necessary in the discharge of its responsibilities, and to examine, if
necessary, pertinent records and documents.
(6) Publicize matters covered by its investigation when circumstances so
warrant and with due prudence.
(7) Determine the causes of inefficiency, red tape, mismanagement, fraud,
and corruption in the Government and make recommendations for their
elimination and the observance of high standards of ethics and efficiency.
(8) Promulgate its rules of procedure and exercise such other powers or
perform such functions or duties as may be provided by law.

Section 14. The Office of the Ombudsman shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. Its
approved annual appropriations shall be automatically and regularly released.
Section 15. The right of the State to recover properties unlawfully acquired by
public officials or employees, from them or from their nominees or transferees,
shall not be barred by prescription, laches, or estoppel.
Section 16. No loan, guaranty, or other form of financial accommodation for
any business purpose may be granted, directly or indirectly, by any
government-owned or controlled bank or financial institution to the President,
the Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme
Court, and the Constitutional Commissions, the Ombudsman, or to any firm or
entity in which they have controlling interest, during their tenure.

Section 17. A public officer or employee shall, upon assumption of office and
as often thereafter as may be required by law, submit a declaration under
oath of his assets, liabilities, and net worth. In the case of the President, the
Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, the Congress, the Supreme
Court, the Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional offices, and
officers of the armed forces with general or flag rank, the declaration shall be
disclosed to the public in the manner provided by law.

Section 18. Public officers and employees owe the State and this Constitution
allegiance at all times and any public officer or employee who seeks to
change his citizenship or acquire the status of an immigrant of another
country during his tenure shall be dealt with by law.

Role of Administration with Executive Authority

As the Executive Administrator, you will manage projects and activities for the
board, senior staff, and committees; organize meetings and conference calls;
review and manage contracts; and write correspondence and other
communications. We will rely on you to have your finger on the pulse of
activities, projects, and issues, including potential opportunities for funding.
You will take projects from start to finish and facilitate our communications
processes. In this role, your success is all about managing priorities, creating
and maintaining relationships, and being warm and gracious. In this highly
visible role, your excellent communication and collaboration is paramount.
You will analyze situations and exercise sound judgment in determining
appropriate courses of action.

Why citizen involvement is important in planning?

Participation and active citizenship is about having the right, the means, the
space and the opportunity and, where necessary, the support to participate in
and influence decisions and engage in actions and activities so as to
contribute to building a better society.

Citizens should be considered a partner in governance, sharing with them

responsibilities and elaborating together local plans of action. So far,
engaging citizens in policy-making allows governments to obtain new sources
of ideas and exchange information, during the decision-making process

Role of Citizen in Policy Making

In democracies, citizens are accorded an opportunity to influence public policy

through active participation in the public decision-making process. It is
important to involve citizens in public decisions to ensure consensus and
successful implementation of the decisions. Citizen participation creates a
sense of ownership among the public with regard to the policy, translating to a
unity of purpose and action.

Since public policies have a direct impact on the citizens, it is rational to

facilitate their participation. Citizens can participate in developing and
influencing public policy by:

 Lobbying their representatives to support or reject policies that are

deemed destructive or oppressive

 Polling or participating in elections/referendums aimed at instituting,

changing, or withdrawing certain aspects of public policy

 Holding peaceful demonstrations, protest marches, or picketing to express

their displeasure at proposals deemed detrimental to the public

 Participating in local public meetings with an aim of exchanging ideas to

inform appropriate decision making

Citizen Involvement in Participatory Approach

Citizen participation’ refers to citizen involvement in public decision making. In

different interpretations, ‘citizens’ may be either individuals or organized
communities, and ‘participation’ may involve either observation or power. The
phrase ‘citizen participation’ came into use to denote remedial efforts to
involve inactive citizens or clients in government activity, but it can include
autonomous citizen activities in the larger society, such as locality or
community development, social planning, and social action. Arguments for
citizen participation variously emphasize benefits to individuals, communities,
organizations, and the society, including increased knowledge, authority,
power, and problem-solving ability. The purposes of citizen participation
include communicating information, developing relationships, developing the
capacity to act, and preserving or changing conditions. Citizens can exercise
different amounts of power in engaging in these purposes. The means of
citizen participation include groups and formal organizations, meetings,
inquiries, action, and technical assistance. When ‘citizen participation’ refers
to communities, participation poses questions of representation. Some
citizens, particularly the better educated and wealthier, generally have greater
ability to participate than others. There are examples of citizen participation
that has accomplished its purposes and solved problems, but empirical data
are sketchy, and no systematic evaluation of citizen participation is possible at
this time.
 Community Involvement in Policy Making

While it would might seem obvious that communities and grassroots groups
would want to participate in planning and carrying out policy, that's not always
the case. They may feel it's someone else's problem, or that they simply don't
have the time or energy to be involved in a planning effort. People who
haven't had the opportunity to be decision-makers often find the prospect
intimidating. Because they haven't had experience in functioning in meetings,
planning, and other similar activities, they feel awkward, and find it easier to
let others make the decisions. They may also feel that they have little to
contribute, or that they won't be listened to even if they are at the table.

It can take time and effort to make it possible for community members to
contribute. They may need training and/or mentoring in order to become
comfortable with the procedures and assumptions of a participatory process.
They may have the skills to participate, but need to be motivated to do so.
Establishing trust in the process and the policymakers may require a lot of
community organizing - door-to-door canvassing, personal conversations,
small meetings in people's houses - before the community is ready to take on
the risk or the burden of participation.

The rewards for the community, however, can be great. Many of the reasons
for the community to embrace participation are reflections of the reasons why
policymakers would want it. Some of them are:

 Participation provides the opportunity to educate policymakers to the

community's real needs and concerns. As we've discussed, when
policymakers plan a vacuum, their plans usually fail, because they don't
account for the realities of the situation and the real needs of the
population they're aimed at. Community members can help policymakers
understand their lives - the difficulties they face, the strengths they bring,
and what they feel must be addressed.

 Participation allows community members to help create policy that really

works to meet their needs. By participating in their development,
community members can see policies put in place that actually improve
their lives, rather than having no effect or imposing added burdens on
them.

 Participation affords community members the respect they deserve.

Rather than being seen as victims or nuisances, community members
engaged in a participatory social planning process are seen as colleagues
and concerned citizens working to improve their community. They are
respected both as human beings - as should always be the case, but
often isn't - and for the skills, knowledge, and effort they contribute to the
process.

 Participation puts community members in control of their own fate. The

participatory social planning and policy development process results in
 citizens deciding what policies will work for them, and gives them the
opportunity to change those policies if they're not working.

 Participation builds community leadership from within. Those who take

part in the process both learn and exercise leadership skills, and also start
to see themselves as having the capacity to be leaders. The most
important step to leadership, and to taking action to influence events that
affect you, is to believe that you have the ability to do so.

 Participation energizes the community to take on other issues or policy

decisions in the future, and to see itself as in control of its future. Thus,
the community development process will continue over time.

 Participation leads to long-term social change. As community members

take more control over more areas of their lives, as a result of the skills
and attitudes gained from the participatory process, they will create and
institutionalize changes that improve the quality of life for everyone in the
community.

The evolution of public administration from the end of the nineteenth

century to the present has taken place in the following 5 phases.

 Phase 1- Politics Administration Dichotomy (1887-1926)

 Phase 2 – Principles of Administration (1927-1937)
 Phase 3 – Era of Challenges (1938-1947)
 Phase 4 – Crisis of Identity (1948-1970)
 Phase 5 – Public Policy Perspective (1971- Onwards)

Phase 1

Woodrow Wilson’s “The Study of Administration” was the first to present the
demand for separation (Politics Administration Dichotomy) between politics
and administration.

Phase 2

In this phase of the evolution of public administration, discussions on public

administration have been tried as scientific discussions since this time. It is
thought that there are a number of scientific principles in the discussion of
public administration that need to be disclosed.

If these principles are consciously applied by the administrators in appropriate

places, it is possible to increase work efficiency and also to develop public
administration as a scientific discipline.

Frederick Winslow Taylor’s book Principles of Scientific Management

(1911) speaks to the application of four numbers of principles to enhance the
efficiency of the organization.
Henry Fayol gives 14 principles for better outcomes from the administration.

Gullick and Urwick POSDCORB is particularly noteworthy. This is an

acronym of 7 functions of the administration.

James D. Mooney and Alan Reiley also provide four principles for increasing
administrative efficiency.

Phase 3

In this phase of the evolution of public administration, basically, the theoretical

concept of public administration is challenged from two perspectives.

First, a new generation of theorists thought that the dividing line between
politics and public administration was never possible.

Second, the administrative theories that have been published since 1940
criticize administrative principles. The question arises as to whether there is a
universal and ultimate principle in the administration.

A new group has set out to promote the idea that scientific management is not
the last word in administration, but that social and environmental factors are
an effective force. This group is known as the Human Relations School.

Researchers such as Elton Mayo, F. J. Rothlisberger concluded from their

research that innovation of principles and its application alone do not lead to
the improvement of production or production methods.

Phase 4

Administrative theorists of this time recognized the relationship of public

administration with politics. As a result, public administration became
dependent on political science. In this situation, there is confusion about what
is the discussion area of public administration.

This is why this phase of public administration is called crisis of identity in

public administration.

To overcome from this identity crisis, public administration came to be seen

as an interdisciplinary subject.

In this phase, several sub-topics emerge in the subject matter of public

administration such as:

New Human Relations theory by Chris Argyris, Douglas McGregor, Rensis

Likert, Warren Bennis.

Comparative Public Administration by F.W Riggs

Development Administration by Edward Weidner, F.W Riggs
Administrative Development by F.W Riggs

Phase 5

It gained popularity through pluralistic interpretations, communication theories,

and The Science of Muddling through.

The aim of this theory is to establish which social, political and economic or
personal forces are effective in policy making.

During this time, the context of politics has gained special importance in the
discussion of public administration. Accusing the conflict between politics and
administration as narrow and self-serving, the new writers have identified
administration as a problem of political theory.