Dagger looks and falling knives were among the gestures of disapproval Congressman Dante Marcoleta endured from his colleagues in the House of Representatives when he filed a bill trying to give flesh to the 1987 Constitution's provision against political dynasties.
Article II, Section 26 of the 1987 Constitution provides that "the state shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service, and prohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law. ”
That provision has been there since 1987 but a succession of Congresses and Presidents have failed to craft an enabling law against political dynasties.
The reason is obvious: those who are entrusted to make this law are themselves members of political dynasties.
Thus, the reaction of Marcoleta's colleagues to his bill was not really unexpected.
This is because the House is the most notorious government body violating this constitutional provision, with politicians hiding under the alibi that there was no enabling law yet defining what a political dynasty is. The dictionary meaning of the word "dynasty" is not just good enough for them.
The Senate, as a whole, is one with the House on this bias against the anti-political dynasty initiative.
But lately, another bill was filed in the Senate which seeks to fulfill the 1987 Constitution's mandate to prohibit political dynasties.
The bill’s explanatory notes stated it is "time to break the barriers that prevent the best and the brightest from serving the Filipino people."
"Given that this measure complies with the legislature's mandate to enact an anti-political dynasty law and is a step towards leveling the playing field in politics and governance, the passage thereof is earnestly sought," the explanatory note stated.
"Political dynasties, in effect, have exhausted resources to attain economic and political dominance while at the same time compromising political competition and undermining accountability," it added.
Under SB 2730, "No spouse or person related within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity, whether legitimate or illegitimate, full or half blood, to an incumbent elective official seeking re-election, shall be allowed to hold or run for any elective office in the same city and/or province, or any party list in the same election."
It provides that if the constituency of the incumbent elective official is national in character, such relatives should be disqualified from running only within the same province where the former is domiciled or in any, including the same, national position.
No person with "a political dynasty relationship to the incumbent shall immediately succeed to the position of the latter," the bill stated.
The bill requires any person running for any elective public office to file a sworn statement with the Commission on Elections (Comelec) that he or she does not have a political dynasty relationship with any incumbent public official running for an elective public office in the same city and/or province other than the position earlier mentioned.
It also cited a Harvard Academy research study in 2011 that showed how political dynasties stem from the tendency of elites to "persist and reproduce their power over time, undermining the effectiveness of institutional reforms in the process."
It also noted that Philippine local elections from 1988 to 2019 showed the number of governors with at least one relative in office increased by almost 39 percent, from 41 percent in 1988 to 80 percent in 2019.
The dynasty's proportion of vice governors rose from 18 percent in 1988 to 68 percent in 2019, he said. The percentage of mayors in the dynasty increased gradually from 26 percent in 1988 to 53 percent in 2019.
Another study by Tusalem and Pe-Aguirre in 2013 noted that congressional funds are higher in areas with more political dynasties, but these provinces also have higher rates of crime and poor governance, as well as lower spending on employment, infrastructure, and health care, he said.
This time around, the Anti-Political Dynasty bills of both House and Senate might have another chance at being passed.
Commentaires