ChaCha: Shall we dance?

The call for charter change (ChaCha) is not new. In almost every administration, there have been initiatives to amend the Constitution. This clamor for constitutional reform was spurred by three main issues— economic liberalization, federalization, and a shift to a parliamentary system of government.

On the first issue, Article XII, Section 2 limits the owning of capital of foreigners to only 40%. Proponents of ChaCha argue that this protectionist policy prevents investors and multinational companies from investing in the Philippines, resulting in a high rate of unemployment since there are not many local Filipino entrepreneurs that create jobs in the country. Although the utopic view of an economically vibrant Philippines with foreign capitalists providing means of livelihood for the impoverished Juan sounds tempting, there is a flaw in its principle— it encourages Filipinos to be dependent on foreign control. The “employee mentality” is what keeps the lowly wage earner in the rat race. It is worth mentioning that the Philippines is not only replete in natural resources, but also in human talent and skill. It is sad to see how our brightest minds, who have the capacity for innovation and progress, move to other states because they find no incentive in staying in their own. The protectionist policy espoused by the Constitution should spur our government to stand on its own feet.

On the second issue, the focus on imperialist Manila is said to hinder the growth of local government units (LGUs). This dominance, however, is already recognized in the 1987 Constitution, hence the decentralization of power to the LGUs by explicitly granting them the power to, among others, to create its own source of revenue, and create its own laws. In addition to this, RA 7160 was passed to better define these powers. I believe the problem does not lie with the framework, but with the implementation. Proactive efforts should be made to strengthen the capacities of the LGUs. For example, government agencies in cooperation with private sectors could come up with programs that would generate livelihood using the available resources (natural and human) of the LGU.

And lastly, advocates of the Parliamentary form of government criticize how the current presidential system is reduced to a mere popularity contest, and if the president comes from a different political party from the majority of the Congress, how deadlock keeps important laws from being passed. This is a thorny issue as both the parliamentary and presidential forms of government have their merits and demerits. The parliamentary system is prone to the dominance of one party, and the voice of the minority may be drowned out. Political contestation is healthy in a country. I am, thus, of the opinion that it is not the form of government that matters, but the quality of men that one puts in them.

A friend once remarked how the Philippines has so many laws, but most of them are not being followed or enforced. It then leads one to reflect how maybe it is not the dance that is the problem, but where one puts his/her feet.