PINOY POLITICS 101: ON POLITICAL DYNASTIES Part V

PINOY POLITICS 101: Fifth of Five Modular Lessons

 Social Criticisms on the Issue of the Practice of Political Dynasties

       John Andrew S. Bautista, OP

The existence and practice of Political Dynasties in the Philippines remain a very hot and debated social and political issue of today. It is and will remain, a subject of conflict and controversy that has engulfed not only Philippine politics but the entire Filipino nation as well. In every election period, the case of the practice of Political Dynasties would always be put into discussion and ultimately be at the center of attention - we hear reactions, comments and criticisms left and right, denouncing its existence and thus calling for a move to eventually prohibit them.

Having been told of the numerous negative effects and disadvantages of tolerating the practice of Political Dynasties in the country, how does the society in general react with the proliferation and prevalence of Political Dynasties in the society? Is there an accepted stance, move or aren’t there any law to practically control the growing number of dynastic politicians serving the government?

On the first narrative, the researcher shall present a Philippine constitutional provision which prohibits the existence of political dynasties. On this note, we shall look and examine this provision to determine how the framers of the constitution of our state view the issue and practice of Political Dynasties that go end-to-end from the spirit and ideals of our democracy. On the other hand, in the second narrative, the researcher shall also look at the stance of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines, the local assembly of the Catholic Church Hierarchy in the country, considered as widely influential when it comes to making a moral stance, judgments and viewpoints concerning the relevant social issues that are happening in the Philippine society.

The 1987 Constitutional Provision Prohibiting the Existence of Political Dynasties

As mentioned earlier, before the Marcos dictatorship, in what has been described as an era of elite democracy, political control was dominated by a relatively small class of political families like the Ortegas in La Union, the Abads in Batanes, the Albanos in Isabela, the Cojuangcos in Tarlac, the Laurels in Batangas, the Fuentebellas in Camarines Sur, the Aquinos in Sorsogon, and the Cuencos and the Osmeñas in Cebu, to name some.

Under the authoritarian regime of Marcos, some survived and thrived like the Ablans in Ilocos Norte, the Asistios in Caloocan, the Dys in Isabela, the Escuderos of Sorsogon, the Josons in Nueva Ecija, and the Romualdezes in Leyte.[1]

Full with idealism after the end of Marcos era and dictatorship, the framers of the 1987 Constitution, painfully aware of the potential abuse and excess of allowing select families to have political control, introduced Article II, Section 26, which states that: “The State shall guarantee equal access to opportunities for public service andprohibit political dynasties as may be defined by law.”[2]

With regards to this provision in our constitution, the intention here is to prohibit political dynasties in the society so as to guarantee its citizens, regardless whether you are an elite or not, to equal opportunities for public service and it is the duty of our law-making bodies (the Congress) to define the same.[3] The Congress is given the discretion in defining political dynasty, which is to identify and clarify what comprises a political dynasty, to what extent in terms of the degree of consanguinity a dynastic politician should be prohibited from running into office and among other technicalities. 

Throughout the years, there have been various attempts to pass an enabling law to implement Article II, Section XXVI of the 1987 constitution. In 2004, then Senator Alfredo Lim filed Senate bill 1317, an anti-dynasty bill, followed by Senator Panfilo Lacson in 2007, and Senator Miriam Santiago in 2011. The latest and the most recent move that many touted as “a promising step” towards passing an Anti-Dynasty law, is House Bill 3587 or the Act Prohibiting the Establishment of Political Dynasties that prohibits relatives up to the second degree of consanguinity to hold or run for both national and local office in “successive, simultaneous, or overlapping terms.”[4] It was also specified in this bill that elective posts would not be passed on to a member of the same family. It states that no person within the prohibited civil degree of relationship to the incumbent will be allowed to immediately succeed to the position of the latter.

In addition, Capiz Representative Fredenil Castro, stated and described this bill as “a proposed anti-political dynasty law to provide equal access of opportunities for public service for everybody, regardless of status in life, to have equal access to opportunity for public service.”[5] As of the moment, the said proposed bill is still in the House plenary, it still awaits the legislators in the congress to open this bill for debates and amendments subject for discussion.

Still, almost 27 years after the ratification of the 1987 constitution, the reality is that an anti-dynasty bill has yet to be passed. In a congress populated by politicians who come from political families, numerous scholars and analysts believe that passing an anti-dynasty bill is next to impossible given the current political arena we have in the country.

[1] Julio C. Teehankee, Emerging Dynasties in the Post-Marcos House of Representatives, Philippine Political Science Journal, Vol. 22 No.45 (2012)

[2] The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines  Article II: Section XXVI, 3.

[3] Constitutional Construction implies that the above quoted section is by its terms not self- executing or self-implementing as most constitutional provision are or should be immediately effective without a need for statutory implementation. Section 26 is the opposite and will remain toothless unless this provision is activated by the Congress. Cf. Hector de Leon, Textbook on the Philippine Constitution, (Rex Publishing, 1994), 79.

[4] Miguel S. Fernandez III, “Anti-Political Dynasty Bill reaches house plenary”, Philippine Daily Inquirer, May 6, 2014, http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/600110/anti-political-dynasty-bill-reaches-plenary /.html (accessed November 9, 2014).

[5] Ibid.,

[6] A Pastoral Statement of the CBCP on certain issues of today: On Political Dynasties, January 28, 2013, http://cbcponline.net/v2/?p=9492 /.html (accessed November 9, 2014).

[7] A Pastoral Statement of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) on certain issues of today: On Political Dynasties, (January 2013).

[8] CBCP’s attack vs political dynasties not the first time, CBCP News Online, January 30, 2013. http://www.cbcpnews.com/cbcpnews/?p=12531/.html (accessed November 9, 2014).