Our dilemma is simply this: federalism requires constitutional change and cha-cha (charter change) has been copyrighted by the occupants of Malacanang whose motives are always suspect. Our dilemma is Mrs. Gloria Arroyo.
Many supporters of federalism squirmed when the President announced her support for federalism (again!). While at this, why is it that she suddenly remembers federalism when her administration is in trouble? I remember she campaigned assiduously for federalism at the height of the “Hello Garci” crisis. Now, she rediscovers federalism amidst the controversy generated by her government’s inept handling of the peace process with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF).
As far as the first effort was concerned, she dangled federalism to move ahead with efforts to pursue a shift to a parliamentary system but dropped it (to the disappointment of Dr. Jose Abueva and the CMFP–Citizens Movement for a Federal Philippines). Now, she’s doing it again.
But let us make some points clear:
First, federalism is an excellent idea. This country needs federalism more than a parliamentary government. tIt aims to constitutionally redistribute powers from the center to the periphery (that is the difference between autonomy and federalism, autonomous local units get their powers from the center thereby subject to its whims; federalism enshrines such power arrangements in the constitution). In short, the principal effect of federalism is that it will make the central government irrelevant. This is also the reason why some opponents of federalism are those who are afraid of this power shift. Here lies the radicalism of federalism–the arena for democratic struggles in a federal arrangement is smaller hence more effective.
Some anti-federalists claim that a shift to a federal form will entrench local oligarchs. That is a valid claim but local oligarchs are already entrenched! In fact, some of them have captured national power to strengthen their hold to power at the local level. Federalism will deprive these local oligarchs of a lifeblood from the national repository of power and influence. State oligarchs (if and when they proliferate upon a shift to federalism) can expect stiff competition from a highly diversified elite class as well as a strengthened democratic citizenry because the arena for participative politics has also improved. The theory is this: Access to politicians in a federal set-up is likely to be easier and information about the state government’s—as well as politicians’—activities more readily available when government is small. With lower costs to participation, participation should increase.
Second, the sitting President supporting federalism (and hence charter change) is a bad idea. She cannot be trusted. And it is not paranoia to think that she will just use federalism to move forward her agenda to extend her term. Remember she said in 2000 that she will not seek reelection. Well, she not only reneged on that and ran for president; she also cheated her way to Malacanang. She doesn’t have the credibility to support federalism because under her watch the powers of the central government especially the executive actually expanded. She has also mastered the skill of manipulating local government leaders to achieve her own ends. Arroyo espousing federalism is like Joseph Estrada advocating marital infidelity.
So how do we deal with this dilemma? Do we just ignore her calls and be fence-sitters? No!
Federalists should get together and defend federalism from being hijacked once again by this administration. By all means, let us debate federalism. Let us start the national discourse on shifting the power arrangement in favor of local peoples. But let us also resist the attempt to prostitute an noble idea. If charter change is to be done to shift to federalism, it has to be through a constitutional convention. Some of GMA’s lackeys claim that concon costs more and takes more time. Well, had we proceeded with concon before rather than waste government resources on the doomed people’s initiative movement, we should have been done by now. Federalism is a radical change in government. It has to be the product of a national consensus. It cannot be rushed. It certainly cannot be fast tracked before she leaves office (it will probably be fast tracked once she’s gone).
Some people call GMA’s endorsement of federalism a kiss of death. I agree. But we cannot let her kill federalism. The same way she attempted to kill democracy in this country.
