 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| No to ChaCha
By Antonio C. Abaya Written Aug. 28, 2006 For the Standard Today, August 29 issue Although I have been in favor of the parliamentary system of government since the time of President Cory Aquino, I am against making the shift to it in the present context. ChaCha is being promoted as a cure-all for all the ills of this unfortunate country. It is not. Under the present circumstances, shifting to the parliamentary system, without first overhauling the political system and without first rewriting the rules of electoral engagement, will not result in any meaningful change. Without first making these preliminary changes, the predatory trapos who now control the present presidential system will wind up controlling the future parliamentary system. With this as the guiding principle, consider how it impacts on the country�s mot nagging problems. Will the parliamentary system dismantle the political dynasties? Of course, not. Why would the political dynasties, who have acquired their political clout and fabulous wealth under the presidential system, do anything to diminish that clout and reduce that wealth under a parliamentary system? It would be counter-intuitive. As far as I know, the 1987 Constitution called for the abolition of political dynasties, and there are or have been only-God-and-the-congressmen-know how many bills filed in Congress precisely to dismantle political dynasties, in support of the constitutional mandate. But none of these bills have ever prospered into law. They are all languishing in some dank and dusty congressional archive, never to see the light of day. Why would these political dynasts, and their relatives, cut themselves off from their cash cow, just because we shift to a parliamentary system? Even under President Aquino, the principal inspiration of the 1987 Constitution, the Cojuangco and Aquino dynasties flourished.. So did the Estrada dynasty during and after the presidency of Erap, and the Arroyo and Macapagal dynasties under the present dispensation. Politics in the Philippines have become a lucrative family business and the fastest route to fabulous wealth. Papa is senator, Mama is congresswoman, Kuya is governor, Ate is mayor, and the family idiot in showbiz is councilor, with everyone aspiring to be president. It beats operating a commercial or industrial enterprise, and it beats practicing an honorable profession. Communist ideologues never tire of reminding us that the Philippines is a neo-colony of the US , and that this neo-colonialism is the root cause of our underdevelopment. It would be more accurate to say that this country is in the grip of neo-feudalism, a form of feudalism in which political power emanates, not from the ownership of vast tracts of land, as in traditional feudalism, but from the control of rent-seeking political offices, from councilor to president. The only way to break up these political dynasties fast is to disqualify all present office-holders and their relatives, from councilor to president, from running for any office in the next elections. But that is not likely to happen, except under a revolutionary government. Will the parliamentary system eliminate, or even only reduce, corruption? Of course, not. The present presidential administration has had all the chances to pursue a serious anti-corruption campaign at the highest level, involving the biggest fish. But the trapos have chosen not to. It is inconceivable that they would suddenly do so under a parliamentary system. The more than 100 graft cases against the Marcos family have been pending for almost 20 years, for chrissakes, and there has not been a single conviction. The plunder case against Joseph Estrada has been dragging on for more than four years, occasionally punctuated with offers of �reconciliation� if Erap would only accept exile abroad. This reluctance to resolve these cases seriously suggests fear of political backlash from rabid followers of the indictees in case of guilty verdicts, hence the marked preference to dribble the ball indefinitely, while searching for a softer solution, such as sharing the loot. In a more judicially civilized country, the plunder cases against Gen. Garcia, Gen. Ligot and Col. Rabusa would be open-and-shut cases that would have been heard and resolved in a matter of weeks, not months or years.. The US ambassador even proposed, in a public speech last March 2005, that the plunder case against Gen. Garcia be heard in a continuous trial, and he offered to supply the documentary evidence in the hands of the US government. That offer has been ignored. One can only conclude that a softer solution is being sought by the Arroyo government because a guilty verdict might tempt the indicted officers to threaten to drag into the open their many accomplices and partners-in-crime from the higher echelons of the military and civilian leadership. The same consideration seems to apply in the Garci, Bolante and other high-profile corruption cases. There is no reason to believe that this will change under a parliamentary system. Will the parliamentary system create more jobs in the economy? Only marginally. There are not enough jobs in the Philippine economy because of wrong choices in economic policies and strategy. The minimum wage law in the 1950s and1960s, our failure to join the manufacturing-for-export boom in the 1970s and 1980s, our failure to ride the tourism boom in the 1990s, our foolishly premature embrace of free trade and globalization in the 1990s (under President Ramos and then Sen. Gloria Arroyo), our failure to significantly curb runaway population growth since the 1950s�.. These factors combined to retard our economic development, compared to our more successful neighbors�, not because we had and have a dysfunctional presidential system. (See my article Why Are We Poor?, Dec. 14, 2004 .) And, despite the perceptible boom in the call center and tourism sectors, we will not experience the rapid economic growth (8% or more per annum) of the Asian tigers if we do not industrialize. The word �industrialization� is not even mentioned in President Arroyo�s mid-term development plan, since it is incompatible with her embrace of free trade and globalization. Industrialization � for the global and domestic markets � was how South Korea , Taiwan and Singapore grew into mature economies. In the 1980s, Malaysia set the year 2020 as the year it will become a fully industrialized country, and it is on target for becoming so. Thailand has become the Detroit of Asia, regional center for car-manufacturing built on a widening industrial base. The fastest growing economies in the region, China and Vietnam , bank on their expanding manufacturing capabilities for continued growth. And all these countries have done so and do so without changing their political system, from presidential to parliamentary, or from parliamentary to presidential. In fact, I do not know of a single country in the past 50 years that changed its system from presidential to parliamentary, or from parliamentary to presidential. Do you? Only from capitalist to communist, then back to capitalist, in the cases of Vietnam and China . About 20 years ago, India toyed with idea of changing from parliamentary to presidential, but the idea did not prosper. About ten years ago, Israel amended its parliamentary system to allow direct vote for the prime minister (Binyamin Netanyahu). But I understand they have since reverted back to the traditional system. I do not know of any other case, aside from Ferdinand Marcos adopting the French parliamentary model, but that was solely to allow him to remain in power even after his presidential term expired. So why are we Filipinos being stampeded into changing from presidential to parliamentary? Simple. To allow President Arroyo to remain in power beyond 2010, legally and constitutionally, as prime minister in a Westminster model, or as president in a French parliamentary model. Like Ferdinand Marcos before her. (See my articles Prime Minister Gloria and Gloria Forever, May 17, 2005 and March 28, 2006 , respectively.) It is all one big hoax. ***** Reactions to [email protected].Other articles since 2001 in www.tapatt.org OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |
| Reactions to �No to ChaCha�
Kudos to you Tony....I agree more than 100%. ChaCha will not change nor improve our current political system, our current economy, but rather will put our country under the control of the current president over 2010 or even for life...... God bless the Philippines . Hope we could have some fundamental steps to take where there will be unity in action, mind and spirit (using our 3 Ts-talent, treasures and time) to do whatever is necessary to help our country and our people. Thank you for including me in your distribution list. Gil Mateo, [email protected], Aug. 29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tocayo! This is another essay that can very well be part of the MANUAL or HANDBOOK for high school or college students for their study of ANTI CORRUPTION TIPS 101 that I keep reminding you must be part of reading materials of our youth that can be featured with the rest of your columns over the years that "teach and train" citizens. In fact, as you will admit, there are other columnists with very good messages...so theirs can also be part of the manual to be given out to ALL HIGH SCHOOL students - parang Bible one finds in hotel room drawers abroad. Tony Joaquin, [email protected], Daly City, California, Aug. 29, 2006 *Siguro instead of SPELLING BEE we can have a contest like QUIZ ON ANTI CORRUPTION = INTERSCHOOL COMPETITION..THUS SHOWCASING MAJOR CORRUPTION TRICKS THAT DRAIN OUR GOVERNMENT RESOURCES (E.G. CUSTOMS TRICKS...IMMIGRATION TRICKS...ETC.) AND THIS QUIZ SHOW WILL BE COVERED BY MASS MEDIA AND ALL TV CHANNELS EXISTING IN MANILA. MY REPLY. But who is going to pay for all this? It costs millions of pesos to print hundreds of thousands of books. And it costs millions of pesos to stage Quizzes on Corruption on TV and in school premises. If you have that kind of money to throw away, you are welcome to come here and do what you want with my articles. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww So what to do, what to do, Mr. Abaya? How about these killings in the country, how can that be stopped? Cesar Torres, [email protected], San Francisco , Aug. 29, 2006 MY REPLY. I don�t know. But in Malaysia and Singapore , they did not kill communists and communist sympathizers. They just threw them all in jail, indefinitely and without trial, legally and constitutionally, by virtue of their Internal Security Act. Which would you say is the more successful country, Malaysia and Singapore , or the Philippines ? wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, I have had the same concern. There is basic repair needed and no quick fix. Jack Sherman, [email protected], Aug. 29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww You are very right in your article. This craving for "Cha Cha" is only self-serving to prolong these hungry politicians' / TRAPOS' stay in power. Doesn't this government ever wonder as to why a lot of the skilled people and professionals are leaving our country? Could it be because this country of ours is being run by a few selfish individuals / politicians who want all for themselves in the guise of "doing it for the people"? I say B.S. to this clamor of Cha Cha being the best option for this country. It was doing well before these trapos got into the picture. They have actually run this country dry of funds and is now very deep in mud. The laughing stock of the world is where we are now.....Tsk tsk! After all these exodus of our professionals and skilled workers is done, we shall be a country with nothing left but the runts of the litter. How then will this country survive? Parliament is good if done correctly...it is so obvious that these politicians just want to extend their stay and the power that comes with it. This "option" was never studied as they say.... they just say so for them stay in their nice rich world for a longer time.... Majority of the people were never told the pros and cons of all these, because they would not get the needed signatures if they were told...they were just told of the dreamed up Pros and they are just told to sign a document without fully understanding what it will bring them in the future. These people behind the initiative are just feeding the "hungry" with tell-tales and feed these dreams to the wanting. These poor people are being suckered into believing that it�s the best option without them truly understanding the consequences it could bring, if ever. This is the worst politicking yet for this damned country for now! What's next....In Power forever? Sayang talaga ang Pilipinas!!! Jose Genato, [email protected], Aug. 29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, Good comments on your No To Cha-Cha. However, I would like to comment about the issues on Cha-cha. Questions whether the problems on political dynasties, elections, corruptions, security, budgets, economic policies and so on will remain regardless of government system or structure. One flaw I see with the present system is that national elections for Senate to the President are too expensive. They become hostage against any interest of the rich who helped them financially. Of course this has a big influence to become corrupt compared with a district or local elections, of course there is a help from rich but this may have a lesser impact on corruption and may be even shorter. Another is a simple GA budget cannot be passed especially when there is gridlock between executive and legislative branches of government. In a parliamentary, the team of executive is part of the legislative, the party who heads can easily get the no-confidence vote. And of course budget may be easily discussed and approved as well as other policies to be made for tune up. Lastly, the 1987 Constitution was made based from Marcos experience, which I voted before because it was the right thing to do but the reasons had gone and I believe the Filipino people deserve to have basic law not from the experience of oppression of freedom but for the bright future to come. I mixed up with different nationalities, one common factor they say to Filipinos: we love and use more freedom to the extent that we lost its value - empty stomach and dignity. Rey Corpuz, [email protected], Aug. 29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Thanks for sharing with me your column on the cha cha. I can boogie, but I've never liked doing the cha cha. I join you and millions of other Filipinos - NO TO CHA CHA! Let's get rid of the dwarf in Malacanang! Crisostomo Ybanez, [email protected], Aug. 29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Abaya, I am so glad for your recent article - "No to Cha-Cha" of August 28. I completely agree with everything you said in that article. I would like to publish your article in our website:http://www.globalfilipinosforprogress.org with your permission that it may have wider readership. I hope other publications in our country will also publish the article to help our people make the right decision over the proposed change of government. I missed seeing you during my recent trip to the Philippines due to unforeseen circumstances. I hope to meet you still in my next visit to our country. Bart Saucelo, M.D., [email protected], Aug. 29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, Constantly changing the form of government is not conducive to long term growth and political stability for the country. What the government needs is a term limit for Congress people as well as for governors and mayors. When elected officials stay too long in office, they become obsessed with power and money. Their productivity decreases and they tend to become lazy.For those who seek public office full disclosure of assets and liabilities must be enforced before being elected, while in office, and after retiring from the job. Those who served the country must be provided with social security income or pension. A hundred years of experience in just one form of government is the pathway to maturity and progress. Dr. Nestor P. Baylan, [email protected], New York City, Aug. 29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Mr. Abaya , I and a lot of people agree with you and I am glad you wrote on this. From Ting Paterno and people with integrity like Christian Monsod, a good friend, and even Mr. Ting Paterno, it will be like history repeating itself, just like Pres. Marcos. Cases like the fertilizer funds will just go away. It is sad that even Atty. Rowena Bengzon , her father would look at this differently. but her law firm was hired to draft, move and, well I don't know much of the details, to get the cha,cha, going. Even Ms. Zeneida Q. Avancena and Pres. Corazon Aquino would not agree with the cha- cha for it favors the administration only and there are fine prints that a commom man will not see, only a lawyer would, to keep her into power. As Congresswoman Imee Marcos said, she is trying so hard to follow her father. It will still be the same people in government, only with different titles. Jaime M. Claparols, [email protected], Australia, Aug.29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony: You are quite right in saying "No" to ChaCha Those "trapos" are trying to put one over the Filipino people by their proposal to shift from the presidential to the parliamentary form of government. They are cleverly making it appear that the changeover is the panacea that will solve all the serious political and economic problems that have plagued the country for many decades since the country gained "independence" from America. . The truth, however, is that no such panacea will materialize for the Filipino people. The trapos would still be in the saddle, so to speak, and they will continue to aggrandize power and wealth. The country will continue to find itself in a rut. The tragedy is that the Filipino electorate may not see through these Machiavellian machinations and simply put their stamp of approval on the proposed changeover. Mariano Patalinjug, [email protected], Yonkers, New York, Aug. 29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, Changing the dance to the Cha-Cha beat will not solve the problems of our country. Instead, we should change the Dancers who have no respect for the laws of the land. We need order and stability more than anything else. We need not be a rich and powerful country. We need only to be self-reliant and to return to the basic values and virtues of our race. Our domestic household pets have more integrity than our politicians and officials who run our government. Our dogs and cats are more self-reliant and self-supporting than these men and women. Why is it that our leaders, who are supposedly Christians and Catholics at that, find it so easy to lie, steal and even kill? It doesn't bother their conscience. We need an honest man or woman at the top. Virgilio Gonzales, [email protected], Aug. 29, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, Great article. I am attaching some of my own. But more important I am attaching a proposal for Clean, Honest, and Credible Elections. The solution is not just computerization . You need to provide transparency, and forced auditability. The proposed solution comes from various sources: Digital pictures of ERs and COCs from Serge Osmena. Municipal COC of National positions direct to National from Mar Roxas, Three sets of PCs with projectors and forced comparison at canvassing centers from Mano�s ballpen. Honestly, I cannot claim it was my idea. I was writing a letter to Senator Gordon comparing the economics of PCs for voting at precincts with OMR counting at the municipal center. I thought I should write something about manual counting at precincts and computerization of the canvassing process. My ball pen just kept on writing at the end I read the 3 PCs with projectors and parallel transmissions solution. I don�t claim authorship I am a messenger. Please help influence the senate and congress to include these ideas in the election automation bills. The bills at present focus on technology neutrality. What we need is a system that will prevent people like Garci and company from manipulating the elections. Mano Alcuaz, [email protected], Aug. 30, 2006 MY REPLY. Thank you. But you have to provide your own URL or website as your material would take up much room and bytes here. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (Copy furnished) Ceasar, The extrajudicial killings will not stop unless the military and police are ordered by the higher-ups to comply with human rights laws. Consider this: despite summons from the Court of Appeals that is hearing the abduction case involving Karen and Sherlyn of UP, General Jovito Palparan continues to snub such hearings. Right now, concerned citizens involved in various groups are fighting so many battles -- 1) a fake people's initiative to revise the constitution where even signatures of dead people were included, 2) on the human rights front, to prevent more abductions and extrajudicial killings from taking place, and 3) environmental disasters such as the oil spill in Guimaras as more citizens call on the government to put together a clearer roadmap for rehabilitation of our marine ecosystem and livelihood/health assistance for affected communities. Are these citizens anti-government or anti-establishment or even pro-opposition? I don't think so. The people I have met in several advocacy meetings truly care about the country. They just want a system that works; and for our laws to be followed assiduously especially by those who hold the levers of power. How can our citizens abroad be more involved? For one, I do hope you guys register as overseas absentee voters. The turnout so far has been dismal. I wonder if our overseas kababayans know that they still have to register once again for the 2007 polls, even if they voted the last time around? Even I was surprised to hear this. Deadline for overseas absentee registration has been extended up to September 30, 2006 . We would also be grateful to know if our kababayans abroad agree to a quick shift from presidential-bicameral to parliamentary-unicameral? Once Comelec throws out the petition of Sigaw ng Bayan, its proponents said they will go to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the House continues to pursue a resolution that would constitute it into a unicameral constituent assembly. Both ideas/initiatives go beyond the boundaries of our laws. In fact, these are unconventional means of revising a Constitution. I invite you to visit www.onevoice.org.ph so you can learn about the reasons why we have been opposing this Chacha. Please, whatever side you prefer to be on in all of these debates, I urge that we all be actively involved in speaking out and contributing our ideas on how best to resolve these problems. Susan Ople, [email protected], , Aug. 30, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, I certainly can't agree with you more. The GMA backed cha-cha is for her to stay in power beyond her present term. With all the mischief that she has committed while in office, she's going to drown in court cases once her term expires. But perhaps going through with cha-cha isn't such a bad idea. It might finally bring people to the streets. I hope all the trapos and greedy businessmen abusing our country now will also go down with her. Otherwise, another street revolt is just going to be another false hope for the long suffering Filipino people. The problem lies in the absence a principled, competent, and popular person to take over. Neither is there a reformist political organization dominant enough to take power on its own. The alternative remains to be a coalition of reformist political organizations, elitist civil society groups, former failed political leaders, disgruntled trapos and greedy businessmen, communists, and reformist military factions. The people isn't going to support this. This brings us to the grim prospect of GMA getting her way with cha-cha, staying in power, and harvesting the wealth of the nation for an indefinite period of time. Man, why is this country so damned! Yet we're supposed to be a religious country and close to God. Precisely, I think, because we blew it in EDSA 1 and EDSA 2. God has now deemed it appropriate to give us the punishment we deserve so we may finally cleanse ourselves of our follies. He does this to those he loves that they may save their own soul. Gico Dayanghirang, [email protected], Davao City, Aug.30, 2006 MY REPLY. I don�t think God cares enough about this country � or any other country, for that matter - to meddle in its politics. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Thanks for the enlightenment on the cha-cha. I�ll pass it on, so more people will be aware of the circumstances regarding the issue. Maria P. Almeda, [email protected], Aug 30, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, Thank you for the many edifying pieces you serve in your column. "No to ChaCha" is a beautiful study in how summary discussions of chacha issues can help educate media's general audience -- the normally uninformed and generally misled public. A no-nonsense, comparative historical reading and a proper skepticism regarding the role formal changes play in restructuring Philippine society and governance are precisely what most Filipinos need in these parlous times. Your "No to ChaCha" addresses this need most commendably and I have assigned this and other past pieces of yours as readings for my UP students. Felipe Miranda, [email protected], UP Diliman, Aug 31, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Thank you, Mr. Abaya, for sending me this piece. Now I'm reminded of "Papa Doc" Duvalier's self-perpetuation as president of Haiti . Shouldn't this give us all the shivers, to not have learned from history (ours and others' as well)? Mr Julian Ariston Gonzalvez's opinion (PDI/June 2nd) mustered some hope about "the very ones who protect [President Arroyo's] country from itself becoming a UN mission area..." Haiti became an international problem because of its leaders' greed. And what becomes of the Philippines ? Frankly, I can no longer hold optimism about this. One with you, Katharina M Duenas, [email protected], Aug. 31, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony: May we have permission to reprint your Aug 29 column on Cha Cha in our tiny, new and yet-to-be-funded website. It is a labor of love, but I really like your piece, maybe because I agree with it!. It would run in our opinion section with very minor edit to give it a context for people outside the Philippines . Visit us at www.asiasentinel.com. Thanks in advance. Lin Neumann, [email protected], Hong Kong , Sept. 01, 2006 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, Glad to hear that that you are against making a shift to ChaCha in the present context. As you point out shifting to the parliamentary system as a cure-all under the present state of affairs, does not include the overall picture regarding the nation today. I don't know if you read 'A practical alternative' by Isagani Cruz. He points out in hindsight, that he felt "it would have been more practical to vote for FPJ who was the man to beat GMA, with his vast appeal to the masses despite, or because of his lack of academic endowments." He points out that he felt it was a risk, but that he was after all the people's honest choice. Subsequent events have proved that my vote, like all those of FPJ supporters, would have been wasted because of the widespread reports of election irregularities that made President Arroyo win by more than a million votes. GMA's supposed victory became even more suspicious with the disclosure of the Garci tapes and the massive cheating in Mindanao by Gracillano of the Comelec, who conveniently disappeared while the anomaly was being investigated. As you point out, not a single country in the past 50 years has changed its system from presidential to parliamentary, or vice-versa. "Why are we Filipinos being stampeded into changing from presidential to parliamentary? It is all one big hoax." We have seen on TV various countries wherein the parliamentary system has found itself with corruption and mismanagement. They also have had fighting and punching one another, like - Korea, Japan, Taiwan, New Guinea and South America. Do you think the Filipino would be an exception to this kind of rowdy behavior in Parliament? Abrazos, Jaime Calero, [email protected], Sydney, Australia, Sept. 01, 2006 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |