WEBINAR 9: REMEDIES & RENEWAL - Barangay Assembly: A Citizen-led Reinvigoration of Political Discourse and Civic Engagement in the Philippines
Michael Henry YUSINGCO
25 November 2020
In 2011, the academic Björn Dressel wrote an article entitled, ‘The Philippines: how much real democracy?’. This is such a noteworthy query because the Philippines played an important role in the democratization wave that passed through Asia from the late 1980s to the early 1990s. It was the first country in the region to topple an authoritarian regime, ousting the dictator Ferdinand Marcos via direct citizen action in 1986. But three decades on, the democratization trajectory of the Philippines is, indeed, still a curious case.
Pertinently, Dressel correctly sees the paradox that has plagued the country all these years. On one hand, he acknowledges “signs of a vibrant democracy” such as high voter turnout, robust civic engagement, and institutional arrangements that aim to promote and safeguard human rights and civil liberties. But on the other hand, he points to “flaws in the democratic process” exemplified by elite domination of both politics and governance.
This privileged and influential segment of the Filipino polity, or “political dynasties”, has been a constant feature since the Spanish colonial period. And while elite families in politics are certainly not unique to the Philippines, the magnitude of Filipino political dynasties brings an unwelcome notoriety. They have been described by an Australian journalist as “dynasty on steroids”.
President Rodrigo Duterte’s family is a perfect example. His daughter, Sara, is the mayor of Davao City, a bustling metropolitan town in Mindanao, while the vice-mayor is his son, Sebastian. Another son, Paolo, is a member of the House of Representatives.
A recent paper published by the Ateneo Policy Center, entitled “From Fat to Obese: Political Dynasties after the 2019 Midterm Elections,” differentiates the scale and depth of political dynasties into two categories. A “thin dynasty” is one where the mantle of public office is passed on amongst family members sequentially. Elections are used by political dynasty members to succeed one another in holding political posts.
On the other hand, the term “fat dynasty” refers to a family of politicians simultaneously holding public office. Multiple members of the clan all participate in elections at the same time, running for different posts. Notably, data gathered over the past 6 election periods show that political dynasties have become fatter.
Studies have likewise shown that lower standards of living, lower human development, and higher levels of deprivation and inequality persist in the districts governed by local leaders who are members of a political dynasty. But a more alarming development is that the ‘fattest’ dynasties are actually entrenched in the poorest parts of the country.
Political Dynasties as a Manifestation of Democratic Decay
Dynastic politicians maintain a firm grip on political power by leveraging their positions in government. Hence, patronage politics consistently undermines problem-oriented policymaking and legislation. The state remains unable to implement social and political reforms that ensure economic development benefits all Filipinos.
According to Dressel, elite capture of government, at both national and local levels, means “effective participation and true representation are largely illusory.” Political dynasties are so unshakable in their positions of power they have become essentially insulated from electoral competition.
One to three fat dynasties and a couple of thin dynasties usually dominate local elections. In some instances, candidates from political clans run for office virtually unopposed. A non-dynastic politico winning over a dynastic one is an exceedingly rare occurrence indeed.
And so as local communities continue to suffer inept and corrupt dynastic leaders, Filipinos who are more qualified, passionate, and patriotic, including many from younger demographics have little to no chance at all to be elected. Political reformists who lack inherited political advantage are effectively denied a fair shot at public office because of the current monarchical nature of electoral politics.
In sum, the gross expansion of political dynasties over the course of three decades has sustained a political culture steeped in corruption and clientelism. This is precisely the reason why public administration in the country, including policymaking at the top level of the executive branch and even the legislative process itself, consistently earn poor marks in democracy indices.
Moreover, the grotesque supremacy of political elites has utterly marginalized a huge segment of the Philippine polity in the electoral process. Elections now appear to be an ineffective democratic mechanism for the people to elect only deserving political leaders.
Political dynasties manifest democratic decay in the Philippines because they exemplify the incremental degradation of constitutional democracy in the country. Their domination of the political system has sustained the dysfunction afflicting state governance and has made electoral politics essentially a “choosing the lesser evil” proposition for Filipinos.
The Barangay Assembly as a Means to Revitalize Democracy
It is worth noting that the 1987 Constitution actually mandates Congress to enact a law prohibiting political dynasties (Article II, Section 26). But such a statute has yet to be passed because of the reality that most legislators belong to political dynasties. In fact, political reform advocates have accepted the impossibility of absolute prohibition and have instead settled for the enactment of legislation regulating political dynasties. This would be a law that would merely institutionalize a legal threshold to limit the number of family members holding public office simultaneously. But this measure has also been effectively blocked by dynastic lawmakers.
While this advocacy cannot be abandoned, other ways to push back against political dynasty influence over the political system must be pursued. Two provisions of the 1987 Constitution offer guidance to another approach, namely:
1) Article II, Section 1. - The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.
2) Article XIII, Section 16. - The right of the people and their organizations to effective and reasonable participation at all levels of social, political, and economic decision-making shall not be abridged. The State shall, by law, facilitate the establishment of adequate consultation mechanisms.
The Constitution clearly sanctions the active participation of citizens in governance. These provisions essentially manifest a profound call to Filipinos to reclaim their ability to influence the political space. One way of achieving this goal is to provide them the means and the forum to regularly engage with the burning issues of the day. To institutionalize a process where common folks can freely formulate their views and have the courage and comfort of having their voices heard by others in the polity, including political dynasties. It is worth noting that Dressel maintains that “while Philippine elites seem content with maintaining minimal democratic procedures, civil society continues to push for ‘participatory democracy’”.
Notably, such a community forum already exists, it is called the Barangay Assembly. The barangay is the smallest territorial and political subdivision of the state. Its governing authority is comprised of a chairperson and a seven-member council, all of whom are directly elected by registered voters in the barangay. By law there shall be a Barangay Assembly in each of the country’s 42,046 barangays.
The Barangay Assembly shall be comprised of residents of the barangay aged fifteen years or over. By law, it shall meet at least twice a year to hear and discuss matters that impact the barangay. Notably, meetings can be called by the chairman or by at least four members of the council, or upon written petition of at least five percent (5%) of the assembly members.
The Barangay Assembly can: (a) initiate legislative processes by recommending to the council the adoption of local measures; (b) directly enact or amend any ordinance; and (c) hear and pass upon the semestral report of the council concerning its activities and finances.
The Barangay Assembly is clearly a legal mechanism that facilitates participatory governance. Through this institution, citizens can directly formulate policies for their community. They can also collectively initiate action to influence the powers-that-be in their locality. Indeed, this process, if properly utilized, can empower Filipinos to mount a serious challenge to political dynasties.
Nonetheless, the reality is, unless the Barangay Assembly convenes, citizens at the grassroots level will not be able to exercise or assert these aforementioned powers.
And of course, one reason why the Barangay Assembly is not widely utilized in the way it was designed by law is the fact that many barangay officials are co-opted by local political dynasties. Many barangays leaders owe loyalty to powerful families in their area, even though by law the barangay government must be apolitical.
An Emphasis on Deliberative Democracy
To make the Barangay Assembly truly a vehicle for a citizen-led reinvigoration of political discourse and civic action, civil society organizations (CSOs) must be conscripted to help organize and manage the proceedings. It is worth noting that CSOs in the Philippines are generally held in high regard and are considered a strong force in the political arena. The involvement of CSOs in terms of moderating the sessions of the Barangay Assembly is vital because citizens must be willing to engage in rational discourse, free of any kind of coercion or manipulation.
This CSO-Barangay Assembly joint effort is really a nod to the theory of deliberative democracy where communication and reflection are considered core principles. For deliberative democrats, democracy is not just about the polity making political decisions through elections, but it is also about the polity undertaking informed, respectful, and inclusive deliberation as part of this decision-making ritual.
Notably, CSOs are inherently oriented towards promoting dialogue and consensus-building. They have the technical expertise to conduct vibrant and inclusive discussions where participants with different views and concerns have a chance to be heard. Such that even if no consensus is ever reached at the end, people still come out of the discussion with a better and more complete understanding of the issues being deliberated upon. Having this mindset is particularly important because it makes cooperation and collective action possible. At the very least, it can keep the line of communication within a group of diverse views and interests open.
Furthermore, participants of such deliberative processes have been found to become more motivated to engage with government and even take part in electoral politics. More importantly, those who regularly participate in structured but open public discussions tend to share their learnings to their friends and families, thereby expanding the effects of the deliberative process. Arguably, the deliberative experiences in community forums parlay into essential democratic capacities for the polity. This potentially increases the size and strength of an empowered citizenry that is so vital to the democratic consolidation process.
Poignantly, the raison d'être of the Barangay Assembly is to exemplify the Filipino indigenous custom of collective action known as “bayanihan”. Therefore, it is the natural venue for a community-led effort to reinvigorate political discourse and civic engagement in the country. Ordinary Filipinos can exert more influence in local politics and governance by routinely utilizing this legal mechanism in collaboration with CSOs as a forum that fosters deliberative democracy. And in doing so, the polity eventually upending the domination of political dynasties becomes a distinct possibility.
Conclusion
Democratic decay in the Philippines is a direct result of the expansion of political dynasties. Congress has refused to enact a measure to stem, or even just regulate, their growth despite an explicit mandate in the 1987 Constitution. Hence, other ways to counter this socio-political pathology must be pursued.
The national Constitution offers an option for reformists in the form of provisions that sanction robust citizen participation in government. The Barangay Assembly is a legal mechanism that facilitates the implementation of this constitutional directive. But in order to make it an effective tool to diminish the influence of political dynasties, the Barangay Assembly sessions must be carried out in collaboration with CSOs.
A CSO-Barangay Assembly joint effort is the most viable way to foster genuine and meaningful discourse amongst communities following deliberative democracy principles and methodologies. When done on a regular basis, this could lead to a politically active and potentially more assertive citizenry. Putting Filipinos squarely back on the path to deepening democracy in the Philippines.
Michael Henry Yusingco is a senior research fellow at the Ateneo Policy Center of the Ateneo School of Government in Metro Manila and a fellow of the Institute for Autonomy and Governance in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. He is also a lecturer at the School of Law and Governance of the University of Asia and the Pacific. He is a legislative and policy consultant and a regular contributor to various news and public affairs outlets in Asia and Australia. He has authored two books: ‘Rethinking the Bangsamoro Perspective’ and ‘Engaging the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region: A Handbook for Civil Society Organizations’.