the philippine political structure essay pdf

Understanding Culture, Society and Politics

Political structures in the philippines (part i).

• Teaching Resources

Author: Ruth Lusterio-Rico

What do you think about our modules? Please let us know by answering this short survey!

DOWNLOAD SLIDES HERE

Lesson 1: Right to Rule and the Social Contract

Lesson Objectives

At the end of the lesson, the student is expected to be able to:

• Define political structures; 
• Explain the concepts of power, authority, legitimacy, rights, social contract, constitution;
• Appraise arguments about the bases of existence of political structures; and
• Examine the functions of political structures, particularly, in Philippine society today.

Key Concepts

• Political Institutions – system of behaviors occurring in governance; also “political structures”
• Power –  ability to do something in order to achieve a desired outcome 
• Authority – rightful or legitimate power
• Social Contract – agreement made by the members of society with those with authority that determines their relations with one another
• Political Obligation – responsibility of citizens to abide by or follow the government

Study Guide 

Introduction to the Lesson: 

• To have an idea about who Thomas Hobbes was and what England was like during his lifetime:
• Read this short article on the Life and Works of Thomas Hobbes by Duncan, Stewart, “Thomas Hobbes”,  The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy  (Spring 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes/#1
• Watch this short video on Thomas Hobbes and England in the 17 th century, https://youtu.be/9i4jb5XBX5s .
• Read the excerpts from the Leviathan in Curtis, ed. Great Political Theories , Vol. 1, pp. 296-315.
• To know who John Locke was:
• Read about the life and works of John Locke from this article from the International Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://iep.utm.edu/locke/#H1  
• Watch this video clip on the life and legacy of John Locke, https://youtu.be/b2NnEfhQ15M . 
• Read the excerpts from the Second Treatise of Civil Government (Curtis, ed. Great Political Theories, Vol. 1, pp. 337-354).
• To learn more about Rousseau and his contributions:
• Read about his life and works from this article, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rousseau/#Life ; 
• Watch this video, Jean Jacques Rousseau Biography https://youtu.be/VqOaG24aPSc ; and   
• Read the excerpts from the Social Contract (Ebenstein and Ebenstein, Great Political Thinkers, pp. 505-506, 508-520).

  The Social Contract Theory

As we know, power is found in different types of social and political structures. In its broadest meaning, power refers to the ability to do something in order to achieve a desired outcome. Legitimate power – or one that is recognized to be rightful – is called authority . Thus, a person is obeyed by others because he or she is recognized as a rightful or legitimate leader. The sociologist, Max Weber (1864-1920) studied the transformation of societies and observed that the bases of the legitimacy of rule vary in different types of societies. Weber identified three pure types of authority: traditional, charismatic, and legal-rational. In certain cases, the type of authority may be a mix of these types.

Political structures in different societies have evolved over time. Historical experiences (such as having been colonized) and cultural practices are some of the factors that have influenced the development and functioning of political structures in various societies. The so-called Social Contract Theory from the ideas of three political thinkers who lived from the 16 th to the 18 th centuries, namely, Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), John Locke (1632 to 1704) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1788), offer some explanations about the nature of the state and its institutions, the power that the rulers of the state exercise, and the rights of the citizens. In a nutshell, these ideas provide explanations about why societies and governments were formed. 

Oftentimes, a state is thought of to be synonymous with government. Many Filipinos, in fact, may tend to think of the state in this way. This is understandable because the state exercises its power through the government and its various institutions. However, the state, as defined above, is much more than the government.

There are many views regarding the origin and nature of the state. From the Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle, we learn that the state is a natural institution. It is natural because it emerges from the necessity to work together so that certain needs can be met and goals can be achieved. Thus, the state exists because people need to live together. 

Human beings are by nature social beings. Aristotle, for instance, believed that a person who does not live in a society is either a beast (animal) or a god (does not need another being to provide for their needs). Based on this perspective, a state exists not for the sake of itself but to achieve a higher good, such as the happiness of the entire community—what we call the common good. For his part, the Italian thinker, Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527), argued that the state exists for the sake of itself, i.e., to get, collect, and expand power. 

The Social Contract Theory presents another view: the state and the institutions of society are seen as products of a social contract – an agreement made by the members of society that defines and influences their interactions, particularly with those in authority. As mentioned above, there are three major ideas regarding the nature of the social contract. The English philosopher, Thomas Hobbes, thought that the agreement came about because of the need to guarantee the security of the people. The main role of the political ruler was to maintain order and security within society. Another English philosopher, John Locke, thought that the social contract was needed to guarantee the fair and impartial enforcement of the law. For Locke, human beings lived in a state of nature governed by rationality and natural law. The primary function of the state, as defined by the social contract, is to guarantee that individuals exercise their natural rights to life, liberty, and property. A third view on the social contract, articulated by the French philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, emphasizes the idea of the natural equality of human beings. Therefore, the only justified authority is one that emerges from an agreement among all in which each particular will has been submitted to the general will. What this means is that no person or entity possesses the right to rule over people unless everyone has agreed to such rule. The power exercised by the state is only made possible because the citizens have given their consent and have expressed their will to be governed. The ideas of the social contract are elaborated below.

Important ideas from Hobbes’ Leviathan

Thomas Hobbes’ masterpiece was the Leviathan, published in 1651. In this work, Hobbes wrote about his idea of a social contract and argued that it (the social contract) was necessary for men to live peacefully and securely under the absolute rule of the Leviathan (the ruler). Some scholars have commented that Hobbes’ social contract theory rests on his theory of human nature.

In The Leviathan (1651), Hobbes wrote on the following ideas:

• Nature of the human being : for Hobbes, all human beings enjoy absolute equality; they desire the same thing: power. The “right of nature” is the liberty each man has “to use his own power, as he will himself, for the preservation of his own nature; that is to say, of his own life”.
• State of nature : a state of war where there is no guarantee for one’s life; life in the state of nature is “nasty, poor, brutish, and short”.
• Reason for the establishment of the social contract : self-preservation; people gave up their rights to protect their lives: they have transferred their natural rights to the ruler for the preservation of their lives; sovereign power has been transferred by the people to the ruler
• Role of the Leviathan : to protect people from themselves; without the social contract (therefore, without the Leviathan), there can be no order
• Obligation of subjects : preserve the social contract by following the ruler; disobedience or rebellion against the government is tantamount to going back to the state of nature, which is a state of war.

Political Obligation refers to the duty of citizens to obey a government that has the right to rule or is legitimate. The agreement that people have made for themselves (social contract) is a basis of political obligation. People obey their rulers because they have given political rulers the right to rule. Basically, this is used to justify absolutism and authoritarianism. Under such systems, citizens are viewed merely as subjects who have given up their rights and therefore have no right to resist or even question their rulers. For example, if one lives under this government described by Hobbes (i.e., an authoritarian or absolutist government), a citizen who is accused of rebellion or any crime would have no right to defend himself or herself. It would not matter whether the citizen is guilty or not.

| Self-Evaluation Form (Part I)

Answer the following questions.

1.What do you already know about the lesson/topic?

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2.What do you want to know more about the lesson/topic?

• Sub-Lesson 1: Important ideas from Locke’s Second Treatise

The second version of the Social Contract Theory comes from another English philosopher, John Locke. Locke’s version of the social contract theory differs from that of Hobbes. Both Hobbes and Locke lived during the 17th century, which was a period of chaos in England. If Hobbes argued for absolutism in the Leviathan, Locke’s social contract theory justified the right of the people to resist tyrannical rule. Below are some of the important ideas from the work of Locke:

State of nature: a state of “perfect freedom”; but inconveniences arise from the practice of equality of all, i.e., in terms of their life, liberty, and possessions Nature of man: equal with other men; rational: man has reason that enables him to determine what is right from wrong and recognize the rights of other men Civil society: established by the social contract; to address the inconveniences that arise from the state of nature so that each man does not become the judge of his own case Social contract: does not mean that people have given up their rights, but the goal of the institution of civil society is the enhancement of one’s rights to life, liberty, and property. Role of government: not to rule absolutely but to rule over people as their trustee; sovereignty has not been given up by the people but has been entrusted to the government; people have the right to resist when the ruler has become abusive.

Comparing the ideas of the two English philosophers, we can clearly see the differences in their perspectives. In the Hobbesian version of the social contract, the citizens’ rights have already been lost, since they gave it up for the sake of securing their lives. What this means in practical terms is that the citizens’ right to express their views and be heard by the Leviathan has been lost. The Leviathan governs and all the people need to do is to follow. In contrast, for Locke, while the government exercises power on behalf of the people, they (the citizens) have not lost their rights to express their views and even to resist a bad government. As noted above, the people have not given up their rights but have only entrusted their rights to the government. Therefore, the citizens have every right to take back what they have entrusted to the government. Finally, as the trustee, the role of the government is to make sure that the people’s right to life, liberty, and property is enhanced. The role of government therefore is to make people’s lives better.

• Sub-Lesson 2: Important ideas from Rousseau’s Social Contract

A third version of the Social Contract Theory emerged from one of the works of the French philosopher, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Of the three social contract theorists, Rousseau was the only one who did not have close contacts with people in the aristocracy or work with people in power. The French writer had an interesting background, and unlike Hobbes and Locke, he did not attend prestigious schools or universities. The third version of the theory from Rousseau will, hopefully, enrich your assessment of views on the relationship between the state (particularly those who are in power) and society. The following are excerpts from Rousseau’s The Social Contract (1762).

– “Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains”. This was Rousseau’s way of expressing how the society of his time did not recognize the natural freedom of individuals.

– In the state of nature, man is free but ruled by his instincts or appetite. Therefore, he is not truly free.

– For Rousseau, the purpose of the social contract is “…to form an association which will defend and protect with the whole common force the person and goods of each associate, and in which each, while uniting himself with all, may still obey himself alone, and remain as free as before”. What this means is that, for Rousseau, the purpose of the social contract is the enhancement of one’s liberty. Like Hobbes and Locke, Rousseau believed that a person is naturally free. However, in the state of nature, such freedom possessed by a person cannot be considered real or true freedom. Why is this so? It is because such natural freedom is exercised by a person who is governed simply by his or her natural instincts. To become a better human being exercising true freedom, Rousseau believed that a person must live in a society. This is what it means when Rousseau wrote that, “Man can be forced to be free.” A person learns about true freedom – first, civil liberty, and then moral liberty – only when they live in a society. The product of the social contract, therefore, is a community that defends and protects the rights of each person. The citizen is thus both sovereign and subject. They are sovereign because they are part of the community. They are also a subject because they must follow what the sovereign wills. Concretely, what this means is that the people exercise sovereign power (for example, in choosing or electing the leaders of their country) and at the same time, follow the laws that are made by their government. To do these dual functions (sovereign and subject), Rousseau believed that citizens need to be developed and educated. They must know how to exercise the freedom they possess and not be ruled simply by their instincts. When citizens follow rules that their rulers make, they exercise civil liberty . When citizens follow laws that they made themselves, they exercise moral liberty . For Rousseau, the highest form of freedom is moral liberty. This is achieved when a citizen can identify their own will as that of the common good or the General Will.

– The purpose of the social contract according to Rousseau is to express the “General Will”, which is aimed at the good of all. It is different from the “will of all” which is the sum of particular wills. Rousseau also considered that people may identify the will of the majority (“will of all”) as the General Will. It is not necessarily so. What Rousseau meant by the General Will is not simply counting of votes, or determining how many are in favor of a certain position. Knowing the General Will requires the active participation of the citizens. What this implies is that the citizens are knowledgeable of the issue being discussed and can make an informed decision (not being ruled simply by their instincts). When citizens are active, they are sovereign, according to Rousseau.

– For Rousseau, the people remain sovereign. This means that they are the highest power. Once they enter a social contract, they do not lose this power. They do not give it up (“sovereignty is inalienable”). They also do not divide sovereign power and delegate the power to another body such as a small group of men and women (“sovereignty is indivisible”).

Overall, the Social Contract Theory presents the idea that society was formed as a result of an agreement among men. There may be different justifications from the different writers regarding the existence of the government and the extent of its power over its citizens. But the idea that sovereign power rests on the people who have made the social contract is common among the three thinkers. Moreover, many scholars acknowledge the influence of the ideas from the social contract theory, particularly from Locke and Rousseau, on the establishment of democratic societies that uphold the ideals of liberty and equality among citizens. To some extent, the idea of a social contract has also been associated with the existence of a constitution.

Self-Evaluation Forms (Part 2)

What have you learned from the lesson? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. How will you apply the knowledge you have learned in this lesson in improving Philippine society? _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

• List of Activities

Synchronous Activities (In-class) 

Activity 1: Debate on the Social Contract Theory Instructions.

Step 1. Divide the class into two groups. Step 2. Give them ample time to prepare and to discuss the opposing arguments for this question: Is the right or wrong to resist a bad ruler part of the rights of men under a social contract? Step 3. Allow them to reflect on their stances at the end of the debate.

Activity 2: Discussion on Hobbes Instructions. Present the following questions to students: 1. What is Hobbes’s theory of human nature? What are human beings like? 2. How did he describe the state of nature? 3. What conditions in the state of nature led men to enter into a social contract? 4. What constitutes sovereign power? What are its rights?

Activity 3: Discussion on Locke Instructions. Present the following questions to students:

1. What do you think were the important influences on Locke’s ideas? 2. What do men possess in the state of nature that makes them distinguish what is right from wrong? 3. What are three characteristics of the state of nature according to Locke? 4. What are the two types of liberty for Locke? 5. What is the supreme power of the commonwealth? 6. What are the four limits to the power of government?

Activity 4: Discussion on Rousseau Instructions. Present the following questions to students:

1. How did Rousseau describe man’s life in the state of nature? 2. What does sovereignty mean? Who possesses it? What are its qualities? 3. What is the General Will? What is its significance in society?

Asynchronous Activities

Activity: Application of the Social Contract Theory

Part 1. Imagine yourself to be in a state of nature. Think of yourself as being in a situation wherein there are no rules that you must follow and that you are perfectly free to do whatever you want. 1. How would you imagine the situation would be? Would you want to be in such a situation? 2. Do you think that such an environment would be conducive for you to achieve your goals? Why or why not? 3. Imagine further the situation above to be the same situation of everyone else in your community. Do you think that such an environment where everyone can do as he or she pleases is desirable? Why or why not?

Part 2. After a careful reflection of the ideas of the social contract thinkers, write a short essay on the significance of the social contract for a community. Consider the following questions in writing your essay: 1. Who do you think should be the source of rules or order in your community? 2. Why do you think that person(s) be the source of rules or order in your community? 3. What should be the role of the rest of the people in your community? 4. What should be the relationship between the source of rules (leader) and the people in your community

Rubrics for Discussions and Debates

Lesson 2: The Constitution

• Define the constitution; and
• Explain related concepts to the lesson.
• Constitution – system of rules which defines the responsibilities and powers of the government and its institutions, and the dynamics between the state and its citizens
• Constitutionalism – political components which establish a system of check and balance

Study Guide

Introduction to the Lesson

• To learn more about the Constitution:
• Watch this short video on the constitution and its purposes, https://youtu.be/0UzKD8rZCc0   (video made by International Idea);
• Read pages 501-518 of the book, Politics, 5th edition by Andrew Heywood; and 
• Get a copy of the 1987 Philippine Constitution and read the preamble and go through its different parts.
• Constitution

A constitution is broadly defined as “a set of rules, written and unwritten, that seek to establish the duties, powers and functions of the various institutions of government; regulate the relationships between them; and define the relationship between the state and the individual” (Heywood 2019: 502-503). The term constitution is also narrowly used to refer to “the highest law of the land”, implying a “single, authoritative document or a written constitution” (Heywood 2019: 503). There are, however, constitutions that are not codified or are referred to as unwritten. In relation to the discussion on the concept of a social contract, the constitution is deemed to express the “fundamental law of the land that sets the principles, powers, organization and functions of the state and its government, the relations between state-government and the people, (the) rights and obligations of the people, (and the) relations among the people” (Rebullida in Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction, 2006:147). Thus, in a narrow sense, constitutionalism implies the practice of a limited government ensured by the existence of a constitution. More broadly, “ constitutionalism is a set of political values and devices that fragment power, thereby creating a network of checks and balances” (Heywood 2019: 512). The value of a constitution is widely recognized. Its existence serves a number of purposes other than ensuring the existence of a limited government. Heywood (2019:514) identifies the following purposes of constitutions: 

• Empower states
• Establish unifying values and goals
• Provide government stability
• Protect freedom
• Legitimize regimes

In this way, the constitution serves as the legal basis of government. It outlines the extent of the government’s power and the breadth of its responsibilities. Therefore, the constitution limits the power of the government in order to preserve and protect the rights of a nation’s citizens.

Activity: Discussion on the Constitution Instructions. Present the following questions to students:

1. What is a constitution? 2. How are constitutions classified? 3. What are examples of different types of constitutions? Where can these be found? 4. What is meant by constitutionalism? 5. What type of constitution does the Philippines have? 6. How is a limited government enshrined in the Philippine constitution?

Activity: Video Instructions. Watch this short video on the constitution and its purposes, https://youtu.be/0UzKD8rZCc0 (video made by International Idea) and provide your reflection in an essay of 400-500 words.

Heywood, A. (2019). Politics, 5th ed. L.I. London : Macmillan International Higher Education/Red Globe Press. Lowndes, V., Marsh, D. and Stoker, G. A. (2018). Theory and Methods in Political Science: Political Analysis (4th ed.). Red Globe Press. Tadem, T. S. E., & Morada, N. M. (2006). Philippine politics and governance: An introduction. Diliman, Quezon City: Dept. of Political Science, College of Social Sciences and Philosophy, University of the Philippines.

Learning Material

COMELEC (2012, May 2). 1987 Philippine Constitution Preamble. Retrieved from https://comelec.gov.ph/index.html?r=References/RelatedLaws/Constitution/1987Constitution/Preamble. International IDEA (2016). Constitutional history of Philippines. Retrieved from Constitutional history of the Philippines

• Introduction
• Rubrics for Grading

UP Department of Political Science

• Announcement

Philippine Politics and Governance [Full Text]

Faculty and students of political science can now download the full text of Philippine Politics and Governance books for FREE ! Just click the links below.

Philippine Politics and Governance: An Introduction Edited by Noel M. Morada and Teresa S. Encarnacion Tadem

PHL CHED Connect Platform Link Mirror Link

Philippine Politics and Governance: Challenges to Democratization and Development Edited by Teresa S. Encarnacion Tadem and Noel M. Morada

The books were published by the UP Department of Political Science in collaboration with the Philippine Commission on Higher Education. The full texts were made available through the PHL CHED Connect Platform.

Download two books as one

Eurasia Review

A Journal of Analysis and News

Candidate Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the son and namesake of the late Philippine dictator, flashes a victory sign as he shows his certificate of candidacy after filing to join the May 2022 presidential race, in Manila, Oct. 6, 2021. [Rouelle Umali/BenarNews]

Shaping Of Political Structures And Institutions Of Philippines: Can It Be Redesigned Beyond 2022 Elections For Better Governance? – Analysis

By Rizal G. Buendia

Introduction

Chronicling the historical quest of the country to better governance has been marked by powerful continuities and discontinuities witnessed by both periods of development and regression. Seventy-four (74) years after the Philippines gained its independence from US colonial rule and 35 years since the people regained their power from Marcos authoritarian rule, the country has politically hobbled and has yet to achieve an ordered sense of national development and effective democratic rule. Given the limitation of space, the paper argues that governance remains compromised until structural, institutional, political, and electoral reforms leading to a more empowered government structure, mass-based institutional electoral system, and collaborative governance are institutionalized. Consequently, Philippine society would steer towards political decay and insulate the nation-state from the people it serves.

Conceptually, “governance” is the process of decision-making and the manner by which decisions are implemented/acted (or not implemented/unacted). It is a political process where power is derived, exercised, controlled, and allocated within and beyond the institutions of government. Further, an analysis of governance focuses on the formal and informal actors and institutions involved in decision/policy- making and implementing the decisions/policies as well as on formal and informal structures created or established by power-wielding conventions designed to arrive at and implement decisions. 

As the “government” rules the state or local political community, “governance” pursues the defined goals in accordance with the proper functioning of state’s or community’s socio-economic and political institutions. Drawing from the convergence of paradigms, governance bring together interweaving institutional and political economy factors that shape the economic and social development of the country. Moreover, governance can be used inseveral contexts such as corporate governance, international governance, national governance and local governance.

Good governance is presumed to protect political, civil, and cultural rights and ensure a competent and non-corrupt and accountable public administration. The government’s ability to govern is gauged not simply on its capacity to pursue and realize development goals but more importantly on its capability to create the necessary social, political, economic, and cultural conditions where continuous processes of interaction between social actors, groups, and forces on the one hand, and public or semi-public organizations, formal institutions of government and authorities on the other hand, is allowed and guaranteed in co-managing and co-steering national development objectives, i.e. collaborative governance. 

Collaborative or interactive governance does not only broaden institutional pluralism but also strengthen the centrifugal forces of social pluralism. It maintains a constant balancing process between the governing needs or problem situations as well as grasp of opportunities on one hand and governing capacities or mechanisms for problem-solving or strategy formulation on the other hand. In as much as no single actor, whether private or public, has the monopoly of knowledge and information required to solve complex, dynamic, and diversified problems nor a single actor exists who has sufficient overview to apply effective solutions to problems, it becomes imperative that state’s and society’s responsibilities be fused at the central level and at the same time diffused at the local level. 

Owing to this effort the domain primarily of the state and civil society is made permeable. And the borderline between the state and non-state responsibilities becomes the object of interaction. Strengthening the participation and voice of people, through enhanced civic engagement with the state, can improve accountability and trust in institutions while ensuring responsive decision-making across governing political, economic, and social institutions. In a nutshell, empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality is critical to realizing good governance, strengthening regime’s legitimacy, and sustaining development. The issue of “good governance” has particular relevance today. What is more, democratization and good governance are constitutive of political development and that underpinned a sustainable economic and social development.

Institutions and structures in governance

An umbilical cord ties governance and socio-political institutions. As governance is the process or the power of governing, institution refers to the established organisation designed to provide society’s socio-economic and politico-cultural needs such as education, public service, culture or the care of the destitute, poor etc. and other services a government is obliged to deliver as mandated. 

Distinguishing institutions, organizations, and structures is an important endeavour to determine how these notions are employed towards apprehending better governance. The UK’s Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office [FCDO] differentiates “institutions” from “organizations.” It states that institutions denote as the ‘rules of the game’ while organisations exemplify how players structure themselves to play (DFID, 2003, p. ii). Organisations are thus shaped by institutions, and in turn shape institutional change. North (1990, pp. 3, 5) declares that organisations are the material expressions of institutions circumscribed by “groups of individuals bound by a common purpose.” 

Institutions are generally formal, i.e., written – laws, regulations, legal agreements, contracts and constitutions enforced by third parties, and informal, i.e., usually unwritten – norms, procedures, conventions and traditions that are often embedded in culture (Leftwich & Sen, 2010, p. 16). They can complement, compete with, or overlap with formal institutions (Jutting et al., 2007, p. 36; Leftwich & Sen, 2010, p. 17). Hodgson (2006, p. 2) imparts that “institutions are the kind of structures that matter most in the social realm, they make up the stuff of social life.” They are the systems of “established and prevalent social rules that structure social interactions.” 

Institutions, moreover, are structures that are patterned on the basis of social needs. They include the family, education, religion, the economy, politics, and health care necessities and demands. Wells (1970, p. 3) avers that “social institutions form an element in a more general concept known as social structure” which generally refers to the social arrangements that organize a group or society. Giddens (1984, p. 25) contends that societies and practices  are structured  by institutions (“rules”) and power differentials over people and things (“resources”). They are the underlying cause of social patterns, “organized as properties of social systems” that exists only as structural properties. Structure, for Giddens, is both medium and outcome as it is created through a process. 

Clearly, a brief survey of literature shows that social structures and institutions have a symbiotic relationship. Countries rarely succeed in their socio-economic and political development efforts with the absence of state institutions that can establish, advance, and enforce rules, collect revenues and finance development projects, and provide public goods and services in an effective and efficient way. 

In recent years, the role of institutions for development has drawn considerable thought from development researchers, policy makers, and practitioners due to the collective awareness in advancing better governance and mitigating social and political conflicts. It is now widely accepted that institutions play a critical role in poverty reduction and growth. Political institutions have performed a significant role to safeguard the welfare and rights of citizens of the country and to ensure the unity and integrity of the nation. Strong institutions and good governance further result in the overall development of the country. It is against this backdrop that Philippine governance is examined by appraising the role of its public institutions – policies, legal frameworks, informal norms and codes of conduct – in sluggish quest to better governance. 

Appraising socio-political structures and institutions in Philippine governance: today’s implications

The country’s colonial past – more than three centuries under Spain (333 years), almost five decades (46 years) under the Americans, and three (3) years under the Japanese – left an indelible impact into the country’s structures and institutions in politics and governance. Although direct American colonial rule in the Philippines is much shorter, the US can be credited for the development of the country’s democratic institutions.  The Americans prompted political participation as the key process in training Filipinos for self-government. 

In spite of the trappings of civil and political institutions introduced by the colonizers, Filipino values, norms, and characteristics of familialism, personalism, and parochialism persisted and failed to develop among the people the concept of social well-being or national welfare (Abueva 1971, pp. 1-24). Even if democratic institutions taught civil and political rights, the ideals of nationalism, patriotism, and social justice were either repressed or insubstantially inculcated in peoples’ consciousness and temperaments, especially among the country’s leaders. 

Landes (1991, p. 71) aptly describes those institutions overlaid by developed countries to underdeveloped/developing ones suffer from institutional inadequacies and incapacities to perform their roles in the latter due to mismatch in the politico-economic and cultural systems and structures between the countries concerned. He says: 

It is a fact of history that most developing countries are also new countries. They have young, untried institutions and administrative structures that fall far short of the task implicit in their ambitions for power and wealth. In many instances, they still have no firm identity, no sense of national purpose, no common interest. On the contrary, they suffer the pains and after-effects of colonial arrangements imposed without regard to reason or circumstances.Government is unstable or, even ifenduring, essentially brittle. The regime may call itself democratic, but the people are subjects rather than citizens . ( italics supplied).

Another key political institution introduced by the Americans was the electoral system which saw the conduct of the first local election in 1899.  The Americans brought in the right of popular suffrage at the municipal, provincial, and later at national levels of government. The imposition of the system of voting in a predominantly feudal and agrarian society effectively extends the patron-client relationship, where the landlord is considered the patron and the tenant as the client, into an electoral relationship where a politician who has authority and wealth is deemed as the patron and one who benefits from their support or influence is the client (see Landé, 1966 for details). The former dispenses favours and the latter reciprocates it by providing services and bestowing loyalty. This relationship exemplifies a “debt of gratitude” type of reciprocity. Likewise, this interaction simulates a kinship dimension with paternalistic landlord acting as the father and the tenants as his children. 

This relationship persists, survives, and continues to be practiced at the 21 st century’s elections with some few insignificant changes. Fundamentally, politicians act both as good and bad patron at the same time, depending on the circumstances.  While on the one hand a candidate distributes goods, services (infrastructure, health and medical, and welfare), and cash (especially on the eve of election day), on the other hand, he or she may turn violent – threatening and terrorizing both electorates and the Commission on Elections’ (COMELEC) deputized registrars and inspectors (usually public-school teachers) and harassing their opponents and supporters. Historically, election-related harassment and violence can range from intimidating and threatening persons with bodily harm, to kidnapping and murder. It also includes arson and bombings of strategic locations. Hired goons, private armies, the police and military, as well as armed rebel groups, also figure prominently (Patino and Velasco 2004).

Beyond issues and platforms of government, a politician traditionally campaigns with promises of providing government jobs, financial assistance, educational support and other personal aids. In turn, the voter supports the politician who has the ability to produce tangible and material benefits (positive transaction) or capability to inflict harm or punishment to those perceived to be their “enemies” and “exploiters.” As stated earlier, this psychological make-up of Filipino electorates is rooted on a culture of patron-clientelism that is largely a reflection of skewed socio-economic mal-development where a few privileged classes use institutions and structures of government to lord over the many underprivileged and marginalized sectors of society. 

Although several endeavours to reform and modernize Philippine electoral system have been done, hence laudable, it has to be accomplished in conjunction with the alteration of the current social, economic, and political iniquities. Unless this is resolved, modernization will simply serve the limited interest of the élite and powerful over the greater interest of the people and nation. Tangcangco’s (1997) classic study of the country’s modernization program reveals that electoral reforms will not eliminate fraud where unequal power between government and society exists. Thus, she concludes that the modernization of Philippine electoral system conforms with the “purposes of politicians, election officials, and interest groups to retain defective procedures and loopholes in election laws … rather than of nagging concern for fairness and commitment to democracy by the incumbents.” (Tangcangco 1997, p. 127).

The continuing attempt to unshackle the poor and marginalized sector from elite-controlled and perverted electoral system , i.e., riddled with corruption, fraud, and irregularities, has not bear fruit. Since the use of electronic voting system or e-voting in the 2010 and 2016 presidential elections and the 2013 and 2019 mid-term elections, the usual cheating and other election-related irregularities like vote-buying, intimidation and harassment of both voters and candidates, and the presence of armed goons in precincts have not been prevented. 

It is indeed unfortunate that the character of elections in the Philippines, even after Corazon Aquino was catapulted to power as a result of the 1986 “People Power Revolution,” has not been principally altered. Democracy and elections linger to be weak institutions. Elections under the 1987 Constitution resembled not much different from the pre-martial law period. Philippine party system hitherto is largely a one-party/multi-faction system. 

In spite the proliferation of political parties at the advent of the 5 th Republic (post-martial law period), they are neither different from each other in terms of party platforms and programs of government nor in ideologies, philosophies, standpoints, and viewpoints (Buendia 2021). Croissant and Lorenz (2018) characterize Philippine political system as highly ‘defective elite democracy’ more than 30 years since ‘democratic rule’ was restored in the country.

Electoral candidates’ commonalities lie in their class bases, elite origins, and interests they represent. Hicken (2018) attributes the oligarchic control of political parties and paucity of politically active citizenry or mass organizations to the “under-institutionalized” Philippine political party system. He contends that an under-institutionalized political party hinders democratic consolidation and good governance as it undermines the ability of voters to hold politicians accountable and produces ambivalence among voters on the merits of a democratic society.

Local clans and dynasties including warlords and regional kingpins endure and play an important part in Philippine electoral politics (Teehankee 2018, Sidel 2016, Tadem & Tadem 2016). They are considered as building blocks of politics. Given the size of Filipino families and matrix of interrelationships that bind them, they ensure not only the political continuity and dominance of a particular clan in local politics but also play a major role in supporting the ascendancy, continuity, along with downfall of local political leaders as well as Philippine presidents. 

History has taught us that weak party system, patronage politics, and elitism, undermined the legitimacy not only of elected officials of government but also emasculated the processes and institutions of elections and democracy. Indeed, addressing these concerns are challenging yet the opportunity to resolve them lies in the sheer and unceasing determination of people to place their collective future into their hands.

The quest for better governance through effective institutions and appropriate structures in the Philippines is a continuing task in nation-building. A brief examination of the issues that inhibit the development and enhancement of public institutions expectedly to lead to good governance is traced to the country’s colonial history, carried over after national independence, and extends up to the 21 st century.

As noted in the paper, post-colonial governments ruled through the processes and institutions bequeathed by the former colonizer which were utilized not to expand the democratic space and enlarge the participation of people but served the economic and political interests of the more powerful sector of society. The same system of government and institutions were restored after the fall of Marcos’s authoritarian regime of 14 years. Unfortunately, despite 35 years of ‘democratic’ rule, the institutions and systems of governance were unable to shore up the nation from poverty, economic independence, and powerlessness.

The institution of election was employed to safeguard political and economic power that further entrenched patron-client relationship. The nation, rather than be unified through the institutions and instrumentalities of the state, has been torn apart. The state has alienated itself from the people as corruption, centralization of power, and elitism have been unabated from the 4 th to 5 th Republic covering nearly three decades-and-a half under five (5) (excluding the current one) Presidents (Buendia 2021).

Powerful clans and political dynasties continue to hold power. Thus, the tools of democracy have become devices of violence—both naked and concealed—that drove the marginalized sectors of society to seek refuge to communist and separatist movements. The economic and political crisis that resulted from government’s neglect, abuse of power, and callousness on the nation’s welfare was aggravated under the so-called “democratic” regime.

The institution of Philippine election is beset with procedural problems taken advantaged by the old and emerging political élites to secure, protect, and perpetuate their interests. Moreover, the intense and frequently personal nature and character of Filipino politics has largely contributed to the growing corrosion of political institutions. The agrarian-feudal political culture of client-patron relationship, which views governance as an individual affair, has yet to be transcended. The blurred dividing line between official function and personal duty needs to be accentuated.

The relationship between democracy, empowerment, and popular participation on the one hand and corruption and centralism on the other hand is inversely proportional—as the former increases the latter decreases and vice-versa. Concomitantly, enlarging the capacity of civil society enhances accountability of public officials, cultivates transparency on the provision of relevant and reliable information affecting public welfare, and strengthens predictability on the application of laws, regulations, and policies.

As exhibited by the country’s political history, the use of extra-constitutional, extra-legal, and extra-institutional means in asserting Filipinos’ legitimate right to rule and claim a government that embodies their aspirations and national goals as a people is not a strange political act. The demands for better governance that began in the country’s popular ‘People Power’ uprising, 35 years ago (more than the total period of 21 years that Marcos reigned in the country commencing in 1965), have yet to be fulfilled and its realization is contingent on the re-structuring of Philippine political institutions that would ensure that democratic space is meaningfully enlarged through a more inclusive and participative governance, better representative electoral system, and deeper national consciousness.

Given the country’s historical and current circumstances, it is highly unlikely that the 2022 Philippine elections would create the suitable political, economic, and cultural environment in reshaping the country’s structures and institutions for better governance, whomsoever will be the next President.

*About the author: Rizal G. Buendia, PhD (Political Science) Independent political analyst and consultant in Southeast Asian Politics and International Development based England and Wales, United Kingdom. He is the former Chair and Associate Professor of the Political Science Department, De La Salle University-Manila and Teaching Fellow in Politics at the Department of Politics and International Studies and Department of Development Studies, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London.

Abueva, J. (1971).  Ramon Magsaysay: a political biography. Manila: Solidaridad Publishing House.

Buendia, R.G. (2021). Examining Philippine political development over three

decades after ‘democratic’ rule: is change yet to come? Asian journal of political science 29(2), 169-191. DOI: 10.1080/02185377.2021.1916970 .

Croissant, A., & Lorenz, P. (2018). Philippines: People power and defective elite democracy. Comparative politics of Southeast Asia: An introduction to governments and political regimes (pp. 213–254). Springer.

DFID. (2003). Promoting institutional appraisal and development (Guidelines for DFID). London: Department for International Development. Available from: http://www.kalidadea.org/castellano/materiales/evaluacion/DFID%20promoting%20institutional%20develpment%20guide.pdf

Giddens, A. (1984) The constitution of society , Cambridge: Polity.

Hicken, A. (2018). The political party system. In M. R. Thompson, & E. V. C. Batalla (Eds.), Routledge handbook of the contemporary Philippines (pp. 38–54). Routledge.

Hodgson, G. (2006). What are institutions? Journal of economic issues , 40 (1), 1-25. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00213624.2006.11506879

Jütting, J., Drechsler, D., Bartsch, S., and de Soysa, I. (Eds.) (2007). Informal institutions – How social norms help or hinder development . Development Centre Studies, OECD, Paris.

Landé, C. (1966). Leaders, factions, and parties: The structure of Philippine politics. Southeast Asian Studies. Monograph No. 6, Yale University.

Landes, D. (1991). Rethinking development.In Dialogue 91, 66-71.

Leftwich, A. & Sen, K. (2010). Beyond institutions: Institutions and organisations in the politics and economics of poverty reduction – a thematic synthesis of research evidence . DFID-funded Research Programme Consortium on Improving Institutions for Pro-

Poor Growth (IPPG), September 2010. University of Manchester. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/research-for-development-outputs/beyond-institutions-institutions-and-organizations-in-the-politics-and-economics-of-poverty-reduction-a-thematic-synthesis-of-research-evidence

North, D. (1990). Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance . New York: Cambridge University Press. Available from: http://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/politics-international-relations/political-economy/institutions-institutional-change-and-economic-performance

Patino, P. and Velasco, D. (2004). Election violence in the Philippines. Fredrich Ebert Stiftung, Philippine Office. Retrieved from < https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/philippinen/50071.pdf > 

Sidel, J. T. (2018). Patrons, bosses, dynasties, and reformers in local politics. In M. Thompson, & E. V. Batalla (Eds.), Routledge handbook of the contemporary Philippines (pp. 26–37). Routledge.

Tadem, T. S. E., & Tadem, E. C. (2016). Political dynasties in the Philippines: Persistent patterns, perennial problems. Southeast Asia research , 24(3), 328–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0967828X16659730

Tangcangco, L. (1997). The politics of election administration: The modernization program of the Philippine electoral system. Philippine journal of public administration , 41(1-4), 127–174.

Teehankee, J. C. (2018). House of clans: Political dynasties in the legislature. In M. Thompson, & E. V. Batalla (Eds.), Routledge handbook of the contemporary Philippines (pp. 85–96). Routledge.

Wells, A. (1970). Social institutions , London: Heinemann.

• ← Bangladesh: 50 Years And Declining Political Stature – OpEd
• Australia And Japan Confirm Their Mutual Defense Trajectory – Analysis →

Rizal G. Buendia

Rizal G. Buendia, Independent political analyst in Southeast Asian governance based in England and Wales, UK. Philippine Country Expert of the Global V-Dem Institute, University of Gothenburg, Sweden. Former Teaching Fellow at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London, UK and former Associate Professor and Chair, Political Science Department, De La Salle University-Manila, Philippines.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Philippine Bureaucracy and the Persistence of Political Dynasties A Discussion Paper on Political and Institutional Reforms

The interplay between bureaucracy and political dynasties is an interesting topic in the study of public administration and governance. For one, the parallel development of bureaucratic expansion and political dynasty entrenchment share an identical timeline in history, demanding fuller understanding and critical analysis of the implications that bureaucracy and political dynasties, or vice versa, have on each other and how their relationship influences policymaking and governance in the course of our history.

Related Papers

Eduardo C . Tadem

The results of the 2013 Philippine mid-term elections highlighted the dominance of political dynasties in the country. With all 80 provinces littered with political families, 74 percent of the elected members of the House of Representatives came from such dynastic groups. Despite overwhelming recognition that political dynasties breed patronage politics and corruption, no substantial steps have been undertaken to address this issue. This article examines the general nature of Philippine political dynasties, the reasons for their continuing existence and their adverse impact on the country. This problem emanates basically from three factors: (1) the political and socioeconomic foundations upon which political dynasties are built; 2) the inability to effectively implement Philippine constitutional provisions by enacting an enabling law; and 3) the weakness of potential countervailing forces that would challenge political dynasties.

SSRN Electronic Journal

Victor 'Bobing' Venida

Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research

Research and Statistics Center

This is a qualitative study which described the existence of political dynasties in Cebu, Philippines. The prevailing issues on political equality and perennial rule of political families were also investigated unfolding the Cebuanos' perceptions of political dynasty and its impact on Cebuano bureaucracy. The method of data analysis used in the study was narrative inquiry where storytelling among the selected key informants served as data collection technique. Purposive sampling was used in the selection of key informant politicians while random sampling for key informant voters was determined. The instruments used in data gathering were interviews and observations. The study revealed the true meaning of political dynasty, its advantages and drawbacks to its constituents. Varied rejoinders and call for democracy motivated the selected key informant politicians to continue serving the citizenry. This study recommends that an anti-individualistic voting preferences campaign be promoted by the government, education and youth sectors in transforming intelligent Filipino voters.

Reiner Gallardo

A crude analysis of the composition of the Philippine government would show that Philippine politics is dominated by various political clans. The involvement of families in the politics of the Philippines and the concurrence of the lack of an efficient party system resulted to the rise of dynastic clans that dominate elections. Some authors argue that this results from natural tendency of incumbent politicians to bypass institutional constraints by introducing bench-warmer candidates. Tests on the results of the 2010 and 2013 senatorial elections conducted in this paper prove, however, that it is not merely a fact of utilizing institutional “loopholes”, but rather, an evident intention of political dynasties to dominate the political arena. As argued in this paper, political dynasties behave like political parties in the sense that political dynasties also have vote-seeking and office-seeking tendencies. As opposed to political parties, however, political dynasties treat policy-influence as a means to achieving office and electoral success rather than an objective in itself. The quantitative tests in this paper prove that dynastic term duration and policy adherence to the dynastic objectives have significant effects on a candidate’s chances of electoral success. Likewise, data reflects that incumbent dynastic members and dynastic term duration significantly affects the rank of a candidate in the national senatorial elections. It is also apparent in this study that dynasties are mainly concentrated in the local government.

Khristine Mariele Patiak

toby monsod

Philippine Political Science Journal

Asian Journal of Comparative Politics

Julio Teehankee , Philip Arnold Tuano

This article nuances the poverty-inducing effect of political dynasties. We argue that local dynasties in the Philippines can pursue different development trajectories based on their ownership of local businesses and their province's initial state capacity. Adapting a framework developed by Bourguignon and Verdier, we develop a typology of political dynasties that acknowledges heterogeneity in their motivations as well as in the political opportunity structures that they work in. This outlines a theory of change that fosters the necessary conditions for political and economic competition over time, even in areas ruled by political dynasties. While the focus is on the Philippines, research on the nexus between political and economic competition provides insight into issues of political dynasties, competition policy, governance, and accountability faced by a broader set of countries.

Marj Maceda

Hendrich Capalaran

RELATED PAPERS

Boletim Campineiro de Geografia

Ana Carolina Gonçalves Leite

Revista Enfermagem UERJ

Monika Wernet

Lesley Bartlett

Rev. investig. vet. …

Víctor Leyva

ILMA R.DARAIM

Nelson Silva

Manuela Nelli

Jhennyfer Rodrigues

Langit Biru: Jurnal Ilmiah Aviasi

Dedy Fachrudin

O Tempo, a Ficção e a Morte: as Escritas de Augusto dos Anjos (1901-1920)

Pimenta Cultural , Danilo Linard

Llengua & Literatura

MARIA PEREA

International Journal of Gynecological Cancer

Aashish Gambhir

Adarsha Raj

Lebenskunst

Walter Leimgruber

Osteoarthritis and Cartilage

K. Paterson

International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

Ari Hardianto

International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition

Tímea Polgár

Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice

PETER M . KARIMI

RJ4All Publications

Theo Gavrielides

Diabetic Medicine

Susan Manley

Statistica Neerlandica

Nguyen Chi Cuong

Energy Efficiency

Hassan Adan

Autex Research Journal

mohammad mirjalili

Bulletin de Philosophie Médiévale

Pardo Fornaciari

Revista de Gastroenterología del Perú

Katherine Robles

See More Documents Like This

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Politics In The Philippines Essay

Politics is defined as the theory and practice of government, the interrelation between people who exercise and resist power, and the use of tactics and strategy to gain power in a certain number of people. However, a lot of deeper definitions have been correlated with the term “politics”, both in a positive and negative way. It is now said that politics is a gamble, dirty and decisive, that it already lost its noble meaning. It is once said that politics may be considered as the noblest profession, if only it is created for the service of the people.

Essay Example on About Politics In The Philippines

Ladies and gentlemen, politics covers a very comprehensive area, covering the physical, economical, social and moral aspect of a nation. And I would like to make the simplest yet profound presentation of this topic based on our very own. This is the anatomy of the Philippine Politics. The political system and the economical status are two inseparable factors on the growth of every country, and from there, we can say that we have no stable economic status because we have no stable government.

The economical status is displayed because there is the government that is supposed to manage and regulate the functions of the economy. Therefore, it is the government that plays a big part. The goal of the government MUST be to sustain its people the standard of living that every individual really deserves. But here in the Philippines, many Filipinos live in the upper class, more on the middle class, and MOST on the lowest class, just on or under the poverty line.

Proficient in: Asia

“ Very organized ,I enjoyed and Loved every bit of our professional interaction ”

Why is this so? Is everything the government’s fault? Of is it the masses? Let’s dissect each of these two.

The government is supposed to be composed of the government officials only, since it is called the government. But the fact that a lot of Filipinos do not see is that aside from the gluttonous government officials who fights for power, there is also some of the elite class, the greedy businessmen who have hidden agendas as they make deeper coordination with the government transactions and processes. They both hypocritically reach their left hands to the “ordinary citizens” while their right hands are mischievously getting money from the funds of the people.

A very good example of “multi-tasking” isn’t it? But while they are too busy tricking the people, there is the police, the armed forces, and the courts that had grown inefficient to restore peace and order in the country. There are the once blue seas now black. There are the little children who go to school barefoot with rotten books in their broken bags. There is the usual Filipino family with a dozen children eating once a day under a leaking roof. You see? As the fortunate ruling class is pacifying themselves with power and luxury, the poor ones are suffering.

Now, are the masses blameless? NO. The ordinary citizens were rightfully given the bill of rights and granted with full democracy. But that doesn’t mean that they have to react violently and dogmatically. They were living with genuine sovereignty, free to speak themselves and do whatever pleases them. But that was often the misconception about freedom. They keep on exercising their own independence without even thinking and considering the rights of the other person. Just days ago, the president of the SGC of the University of the Philippines kept on barking about the inept governance of

Cite this page

Politics In The Philippines Essay. (2019, Nov 27). Retrieved from https://paperap.com/paper-on-essay-politics-in-the-philippines/

"Politics In The Philippines Essay." PaperAp.com , 27 Nov 2019, https://paperap.com/paper-on-essay-politics-in-the-philippines/

PaperAp.com. (2019). Politics In The Philippines Essay . [Online]. Available at: https://paperap.com/paper-on-essay-politics-in-the-philippines/ [Accessed: 3 Apr. 2024]

"Politics In The Philippines Essay." PaperAp.com, Nov 27, 2019. Accessed April 3, 2024. https://paperap.com/paper-on-essay-politics-in-the-philippines/

"Politics In The Philippines Essay," PaperAp.com , 27-Nov-2019. [Online]. Available: https://paperap.com/paper-on-essay-politics-in-the-philippines/. [Accessed: 3-Apr-2024]

PaperAp.com. (2019). Politics In The Philippines Essay . [Online]. Available at: https://paperap.com/paper-on-essay-politics-in-the-philippines/ [Accessed: 3-Apr-2024]

• Politics Is War Without Bloodshed While War Is Politics With Bloodshed Meaning Pages: 2 (540 words)
• Enhancing the Quality of Education in the Philippines Essay Pages: 15 (4257 words)
• Essay About Overpopulation In Philippines Pages: 2 (474 words)
• Culture In The Philippines Essay Pages: 3 (840 words)
• Review of Related Literature of Volcano Tourism in the Philippines Pages: 8 (2149 words)
• Philippines Toward a Child-Friendly Education Environment Pages: 9 (2561 words)
• Quality Education in the Philippines Pages: 14 (3969 words)
• Football at Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP) Pages: 2 (307 words)
• Mumbaki Buod Tagalog in Culture of the Philippines Pages: 2 (553 words)
• Male Degeneracy And The Allure Of The Philippines Pages: 2 (566 words)