Political System Integrity Implemented

Rico, Erika Charmain Faye P.
Federalism is a mode of political organization that unites separate states or other polities
within an overarching political system in such a way as to allow each to maintain its own
fundamental political integrity. Federal systems do this by requiring that basic policies be made
and implemented through negotiation in some form, so that all the members can share in making
and executing decisions. The political principles that animate federal systems emphasize the
primacy of bargaining and negotiated coordination among several power centers; they stress the
virtues of dispersed power centers as a means for safeguarding individual and local liberties. It is
a type of government in which the power is divided between the national government and other
governmental units, “Federalism is the mixed or compound mode of government, (the central or
‘federal’ government) with regional governments (provincial, state, cantonal, territorial or other
sub-unit governments in a single political system… (It is defined) as a form of government in
which there is a division of powers between two levels of government of equal status.”
(Sarmiento, 2018)
Federal systems or systems strongly influenced by federal principles have been among
the most stable and long-lasting of polities. But the successful operation of federal systems
requires a particular kind of political environment, one that is conducive to popular government
and has the requisite traditions of political cooperation and self-restraint. Beyond this, federal
systems operate best in societies with sufficient homogeneity of fundamental interests to allow a
great deal of latitude to local government and to permit reliance upon voluntary collaboration.
The use of force to maintain domestic order is even more inimical to the successful maintenance
of federal patterns of government than to other forms of popular government. Federal systems
are most successful in societies that have the human resources to fill many public offices
competently and the material resources to afford a measure of economic waste as part of the
price of liberty.
Leading examples of the federation or federal state include the United States, Canada,
Brazil, Germany, Switzerland, Argentina, Australia and India. Some also today characterize
the European Union as the pioneering example of federalism in a multi-state setting, in a concept
termed the federal union of state Successful federal countries—Canada, Australia, the United
States and Germany—serve as models for the Philippine federal state.
The concept of having a federal government was first suggested by Dr. Jose Rizal, the
national hero of the Philippines this was evident in his essay “Las Filipinas Dentro de Cien
Anos” (The Philippines a Century hence). In 1899 revolutionaries Apolinario Mabini and Emilio
Aguinaldo wanted to divide the islands into three federal states. Jose Abueva a professor from
university of the Philippines argued that a federal form of government is necessary to more
efficiently cater to the needs of the country despite its diversity. The primary goal is to increase
decentralization that can lead to greater local power and access to resources especially among
regions which are outside Metro Manila which has long been dubbed as rather Imperial Manila.
Aquilino Pimentel, Jr is also a supporter of Federalism according to Pimentel, even though
federalism was never intended to appease any followers of any specific ideology of religion, it will
also hasten economic development, since resource and financial mobilization is upon each state's or
province's discretion without significant constraint from the central government.
1
At present the Philippines has a unitary system where the national government is
sovereign and the states are the ones who administer the central government. The current
President of the Philippines President Rodrigo Roa Duterte calls for the country’s political
leaders to shift to federalism inducing the legislature to consider having a constituent assembly to
revise the 1987 Constitution, He has already formed a consultative committee to review the
Constitution and recommend changes, but these are mere recommendations that has still no
effect.
2
The above photo is the proposed federal states. The proponents of federalism in the
Philippines envision 12 component regions. Under a federal constitution, provinces would be
collapsed to give way to the creation of the component regions, which are actually mega
provinces. “We want to federalize in order to fragmentize the otherwise unified political entities
under one government.” (Lobrigo, 2018)
Federalism acclaims that the only way for fast development and continuous progress for
every region as it will give rise to more power to raise revenues and to have their own strategy
with respect to the developmental course toward a better quality of life for their own
constituents, this is possible if the territory of a certain country is big enough so that the
distribution of powers can be divided properly.
As in the discussion of Atty. Frank E. Lobrigo Federalism can be done without

revising the Constitution.
Art. X of the Constitution provides for the structure of local
governments. It thus provides that the territorial and political subdivisions of
the Philippines are the provinces, cities, municipalities, and barangays. The
structural change—from unitary to federal government — is possible under
the Constitution by the enactment of an organic law creating the 12 mega
provinces wherein the component provinces would be collapsed and merged
into one. To make the amalgamation democratic, the organic law must be
submitted for ratification to the respective “citizens” of the proposed mega
provinces, who would then decide in a plebiscite whether they prefer to be
amalgamated into a mega province with enhanced autonomy and revenue
powers, or remain individual component provinces of the national
government. If an organic law is feasible for Autonomous Region in Muslim
Mindanao and the Cordilleras, there would be no constitutional infirmity for
an organic law creating the 12 component mega provinces of a federal
Philippines.
Legislative representation under the Constitution will thus remain as is.

Sec. 2 of Art. VI of the Constitution provides that the Senate shall be
composed of 24 senators elected at large by qualified voters as may be
provided by law. The Congress can enact a law defining the election at large
of the 24 senators, who could come from the mega provinces with two
senators for each mega province to be elected at large by the respective
“citizens” of the mega provinces. This setup would provide for an equitable
representation in the Senate.
Sec. 5 of Art. VI of the Constitution provides that the House of
Representatives shall be composed of not more than 250 members, unless
otherwise provided by law, and those elected under the Party-list Law. The
legislative districts of the collapsed provinces would be retained and perhaps
just renamed.
3
Generally, Filipinos' stance on a shift to federalism is mixed. For some it will be advantage in
a way that it will encourage local initiatives because it permits diversity, for instances local
government units can deal directly on the problems of its constituents, it helps to manage conflicts
like permitting states and communities to pursue their own policies without the pressure of the
National government, it will allow for power redistribution it can be regarded as a protection against
tyranny, it will increase political participants because it will allow more people to run for and hold
office in their respective cities, townships, school districts etc. and lastly it improves efficiency
because the power will be distributed this will encourage experimentation and innovation in public
policy.
Others will view it in negative way for it will allow special interests to protect their privileges
for this can lead to discrimination and competition to the fragmentized the political entities, it can also
lead to uneven distribution because not all states will spend at the same cost it will lead to uneven
distribution of benefits and costs, it is also a disadvantage in the part of the poorer states and
communities because they have poorer levels of education, health and welfare services and lastly it
obstructs action on national issues.
“Under a federal system, they are best positioned to dominate the newly
created local legislature and state institutions, further consolidating their
grip on power in the country's poorer regions. It's no wonder, then, that
most surveys show the vast majority of Filipinos are either against
constitutional change or completely unaware of its implications.”
(Heydarian, 2018)
Bibliography
Lobrigo, F. E. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://opinion.inquirer.net/111720/federalism-possible-
1987-constitution
Torrivillas, D. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2018/08/23/1844958/federalism-good-or-bad
Jr., E. P. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/way-life-philippines-advantages-
disadvantages-enrique-b-picardal-jr
(n.d.). Retrieved from https://opinion.inquirer.net/111720/federalism-possible-1987-
constitution

Political System Integrity Implemented

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Political System Integrity Implemented

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Political System Integrity Implemented

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rico, Erika Charmain Faye P.

As in the discussion of Atty. Frank E. Lobrigo Federalism can be done without

Legislative representation under the Constitution will thus remain as is.

You might also like